Commonwealth v. Clancy, J., Pet
170 A.3d 1038
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedSeptember 11, 2017
Docket119 WAL 2017 (Granted)
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases
This text of 170 A.3d 1038 (Commonwealth v. Clancy, J., Pet) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Commonwealth v. Clancy, J., Pet, 170 A.3d 1038 (Pa. 2017).
Opinion
ORDER
AND NOW, this 11th day of September, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, rephrased for clarity, are:
(1) Where, in closing argument, the district attorney characterized the Petitioner as a “cold blooded killer” and a “dangerous man,” did the district attorney violate the ruling of this Court announced in Commonwealth v. Capalla, 185 A. 203, 205 (Pa. 1936)?
(2) Were the district attorney’s characterizations of the Petitioner during closing argument permissible oratorical emphasis consistent with Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct 3.4(c) and ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 3-5.8?
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Commonwealth v. Clancy, J., Aplt.
192 A.3d 44 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2018)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
170 A.3d 1038, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-clancy-j-pet-pa-2017.