Commonwealth v. Oakes

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Oakes

460 A.2d 756, 501 Pa. 197, 1983 Pa. LEXIS 587

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJune 10, 1983

DocketAppeal No. 80-3-738

StatusPublished

This text of 460 A.2d 756 (Commonwealth v. Oakes) 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. Oakes, 460 A.2d 756, 501 Pa. 197, 1983 Pa. LEXIS 587 (Pa. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This is the Commonwealth’s appeal from an en banc order of Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Common Pleas had granted appellee a new trial and ordered that a statement of his which began at 11:50 P.M. on November 12, 1971, and continued until 12:20 A.M. on November 13, 1971, should have been suppressed on Futch grounds. Commonwealth v. Futch, 447 Pa. 389, 290 A.2d 417 (1972). Because the Commonwealth was never afforded a. meaningful opportunity to litigate the Futch issue, the case is remanded to Common [198]*198Pleas with a direction to schedule a hearing at which the parties may present evidence and fully litigate the issue of whether this particular statement violated Futch.

The order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County is vacated and the record remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

McDERMOTT, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This is the Commonwealth’s appeal from an en banc order of Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Common Pleas had granted appellee a new trial and ordered that a statement of his which began at 11:50 P.M. on November 12, 1971, and continued until 12:20 A.M. on November 13, 1971, should have been suppressed on Futch grounds. Commonwealth v. Futch, 447 Pa. 389, 290 A.2d 417 (1972). Because the Commonwealth was never afforded a. meaningful opportunity to litigate the Futch issue, the case is remanded to Common [198]*198Pleas with a direction to schedule a hearing at which the parties may present evidence and fully litigate the issue of whether this particular statement violated Futch.

The order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County is vacated and the record remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

McDERMOTT, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

460 A.2d 756, 501 Pa. 197, 1983 Pa. LEXIS 587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-oakes-pa-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack