Commonwealth v. McKinney

992 A.2d 109, 605 Pa. 541, 2010 Pa. LEXIS 669

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 7, 2010·No. No. 449 EAL 2009·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 7th day of April, 2010, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, limited to the following question:

By failing to include a Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f) statement in his brief to the Superior Court, did Petitioner waive his constitutional challenge to the portion of the sentencing order conditioning his probation and parole on his agreeing to random searches of his residence?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 7th day of April, 2010, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, limited to the following question:

By failing to include a Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f) statement in his brief to the Superior Court, did Petitioner waive his constitutional challenge to the portion of the sentencing order conditioning his probation and parole on his agreeing to random searches of his residence?

Commonwealth v. McKinney, 992 A.2d 109, 605 Pa. 541, 2010 Pa. LEXIS 669 (Pa. 2010).

Pincite

992 A.2d 109 (Commonwealth v. McKinney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.