Commonwealth v. Loughnane, D.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Loughnane, D.

158 A.3d 1224, 638 Pa. 728, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 1491

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 19, 2016·No. 164 MAL 2016 (Granted)·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 19th day of July, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues.

Whether the Superior Court erred by holding that the automobile exception, adopted in Commonwealth v. Gary, 625 Pa. 183, 91 A.3d 102 (2014), allowed police to seize a vehicle from the defendant’s private residential driveway without a warrant?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 19th day of July, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues.

Whether the Superior Court erred by holding that the automobile exception, adopted in Commonwealth v. Gary, 625 Pa. 183, 91 A.3d 102 (2014), allowed police to seize a vehicle from the defendant’s private residential driveway without a warrant?

Commonwealth v. Loughnane, D., 158 A.3d 1224, 638 Pa. 728, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 1491 (Pa. 2016).

Pincite

158 A.3d 1224 (Commonwealth v. Loughnane, D.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related