Commonwealth v. Reed

986 A.2d 45, 604 Pa. 320, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 2422

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Commonwealth v. Reed. Read the opinion of the Court — 601 Pa. 257 →

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided November 18, 2009·No. 205 MAL 2009·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 18th day of November, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

What is the proper grading of a conviction under 18 Pa.C.S. § 6318, where the trial court at sentencing concluded that the most serious underlying offenses for which the defendant contacted the minor were offenses for which the defendant was acquitted?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 18th day of November, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

What is the proper grading of a conviction under 18 Pa.C.S. § 6318, where the trial court at sentencing concluded that the most serious underlying offenses for which the defendant contacted the minor were offenses for which the defendant was acquitted?

Commonwealth v. Reed, 986 A.2d 45, 604 Pa. 320, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 2422 (Pa. 2009).

Pincite

986 A.2d 45 (Commonwealth v. Reed) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Williams v. Geico Government Employees Insurance

986 A.2d 45 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2009)

Opinion

Related