Commonwealth v. Brown

989 A.2d 881, 605 Pa. 320

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided February 25, 2009·No. 309 EAL 2009·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 25th day of February, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED with respect to the following issues, rephrased for clarity:

(1) Whether Petitioner’s conviction supported solely by out-of-court statements recanted at trial violates the guarantees of due process provided by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article I, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution?

*321 (2) Whether codefendant Walker’s statements exculpating Petitioner constituted “statements against interest” and thus were admissible under Pa.R.E. 804(b)(3)?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 25th day of February, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED with respect to the following issues, rephrased for clarity:

(1) Whether Petitioner’s conviction supported solely by out-of-court statements recanted at trial violates the guarantees of due process provided by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article I, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution?

*321 (2) Whether codefendant Walker’s statements exculpating Petitioner constituted “statements against interest” and thus were admissible under Pa.R.E. 804(b)(3)?

Commonwealth v. Brown, 989 A.2d 881, 605 Pa. 320 (Pa. 2009).

Pincite

989 A.2d 881 (Commonwealth v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Commonwealth v. Brown

52 A.3d 1139 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2012)

Opinion

Related