Commonwealth v. Brown, D.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Brown, D.

164 A.3d 461, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 2803

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 14, 2016·No. 357 EAL 2016 (Granted)·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of December, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

(1) Because an autopsy report constitutes testimonial hearsay, does not use of that report by another expert as the basis of his own opinion violate the Sixth Amendment guarantee of the right of Confrontation?

(2) Because Rule 703 allows an expert to use inadmissible evidence to form an opinion but does not allow that inadmissible evidence to be used for its truth, did not the Superior Court err in concluding that Rule 703 permitted the testimony in this case where the testifying expert’s opinion has

relevance and probative value only if the report he relied on is true?

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of December, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

(1) Because an autopsy report constitutes testimonial hearsay, does not use of that report by another expert as the basis of his own opinion violate the Sixth Amendment guarantee of the right of Confrontation?

(2) Because Rule 703 allows an expert to use inadmissible evidence to form an opinion but does not allow that inadmissible evidence to be used for its truth, did not the Superior Court err in concluding that Rule 703 permitted the testimony in this case where the testifying expert’s opinion has

relevance and probative value only if the report he relied on is true?

Commonwealth v. Brown, D., 164 A.3d 461, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 2803 (Pa. 2016).

Pincite

164 A.3d 461 (Commonwealth v. Brown, D.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related