Commonwealth v. Smith

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Smith

931 A.2d 627, 593 Pa. 415, 2007 Pa. LEXIS 1721

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided August 21, 2007·No. Appeal 722 MAL 2006·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 21st day of August, 2007, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:

Did the Superior Court err in holding that [Petitioner] did not have a Sixth Amendment right to counsel before refusing to submit to chemical testing, based upon Commonwealth v. Ciccola, [894 A.2d 744 (Pa.Super.2006), appeal denied, 591 Pa. 660, 916 A.2d 630 (2007),] where Ciccola incorrectly held that the decision whether to refuse chemical testing is not a critical stage of a criminal proceeding?

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 21st day of August, 2007, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:

Did the Superior Court err in holding that [Petitioner] did not have a Sixth Amendment right to counsel before refusing to submit to chemical testing, based upon Commonwealth v. Ciccola, [894 A.2d 744 (Pa.Super.2006), appeal denied, 591 Pa. 660, 916 A.2d 630 (2007),] where Ciccola incorrectly held that the decision whether to refuse chemical testing is not a critical stage of a criminal proceeding?

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Commonwealth v. Smith, 931 A.2d 627, 593 Pa. 415, 2007 Pa. LEXIS 1721 (Pa. 2007).

Pincite

931 A.2d 627 (Commonwealth v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related