Commonwealth v. One 1957 Plymouth Belvedere Sedan

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. One 1957 Plymouth Belvedere Sedan

204 A.2d 489, 204 Pa. Super. 292, 1964 Pa. Super. LEXIS 585

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedNovember 12, 1964

DocketAppeal, No. 199

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 204 A.2d 489 (Commonwealth v. One 1957 Plymouth Belvedere Sedan) 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. One 1957 Plymouth Belvedere Sedan, 204 A.2d 489, 204 Pa. Super. 292, 1964 Pa. Super. LEXIS 585 (Pa. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Ervin, J.,

This is an appeal by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board from the order of the court below denying the board’s petition for the forfeiture of a 1957 Plymouth Belvedere four-door sedan.

[293]*293The opinion of the court below clearly reveals that the forfeiture was refused because of the illegal seizure of the automobile by the police officers. In the case of Com. v. One 1958 Plymouth Sedan (McGonigle), 414 Pa. 540, 201 A. 2d 427, our Supreme Court held that the validity of the seizure is of no moment and that such illegal seizure would not preclude the civil proceeding for the forfeiture of the automobile. We will, therefore, remand this case to the court below so that it may exercise its discretion and determine, after hearing, whether the forfeiture should be allowed.

Eemanded.

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

Opinion by

Ervin, J.,

This is an appeal by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board from the order of the court below denying the board’s petition for the forfeiture of a 1957 Plymouth Belvedere four-door sedan.

[293]*293The opinion of the court below clearly reveals that the forfeiture was refused because of the illegal seizure of the automobile by the police officers. In the case of Com. v. One 1958 Plymouth Sedan (McGonigle), 414 Pa. 540, 201 A. 2d 427, our Supreme Court held that the validity of the seizure is of no moment and that such illegal seizure would not preclude the civil proceeding for the forfeiture of the automobile. We will, therefore, remand this case to the court below so that it may exercise its discretion and determine, after hearing, whether the forfeiture should be allowed.

Eemanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.2d 489, 204 Pa. Super. 292, 1964 Pa. Super. LEXIS 585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-one-1957-plymouth-belvedere-sedan-pasuperct-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack