Commonwealth v. Fugarino

429 A.2d 109, 288 Pa. Super. 593
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedAugust 8, 1980
DocketNo. 1727
StatusPublished

This text of 429 A.2d 109 (Commonwealth v. Fugarino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior 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. Fugarino, 429 A.2d 109, 288 Pa. Super. 593 (Pa. Ct. App. 1980).

Opinion

We vacate the judgment of sentence and remand this case for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the witness Inverso’s identification testimony was the fruit of a violation of appellant’s constitutional rights. If such a violation is found to have occurred, appellant must be granted a new trial. If such violation is found not to have occurred, judgment of sentence shall be reinstated. Appellant and the Commonwealth may appeal from the decision of the eviden-tiary court. Cf. Commonwealth v. Polsky, 485 Pa. 360, 402 A.2d 1003 (1979).

WICKERSHAM, J., filed a memorandum dissenting statement.

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Polsky
402 A.2d 1003 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
429 A.2d 109, 288 Pa. Super. 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-fugarino-pasuperct-1980.