Commonwealth v. Walters, P.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Walters, P.

DecidedOctober 18, 2022

Docket195 MAL 2022 (Granted)

StatusPublished

This text of Commonwealth v. Walters, P. (Commonwealth v. Walters, P.) 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. Walters, P., (Pa. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 195 MAL 2022 : Respondent : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Superior Court v. : : : PHILLIP DONALD WALTERS, : : Petitioner :

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of October, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to the

remaining issue. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Whether the Superior Court misapplied controlling case law and misapprehended controlling facts in concluding that the trial court did not err as a matter of law or abuse its discretion in allowing the Commonwealth to present the testimony of Dr. Gary Ross concerning the cause of death “by history[,]” which was devoid of any objective medical findings and did not comport with a conclusion or opinion “within a reasonable degree of medical certainty” thereby not only improperly bolstering the credibility of Gabel Bell but depriving Petitioner of his right to due process and a fair trial?

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

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 195 MAL 2022 : Respondent : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Superior Court v. : : : PHILLIP DONALD WALTERS, : : Petitioner :

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of October, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to the

remaining issue. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Whether the Superior Court misapplied controlling case law and misapprehended controlling facts in concluding that the trial court did not err as a matter of law or abuse its discretion in allowing the Commonwealth to present the testimony of Dr. Gary Ross concerning the cause of death “by history[,]” which was devoid of any objective medical findings and did not comport with a conclusion or opinion “within a reasonable degree of medical certainty” thereby not only improperly bolstering the credibility of Gabel Bell but depriving Petitioner of his right to due process and a fair trial?

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Commonwealth v. Walters, P., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-walters-p-pa-2022.