• Commonwealth v. Baumann

    Publication Date: 2024-01-15
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Bowes
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 1923 EDA 2022

    Trial court erroneously revoked probation for defendant's failure to submit to a polygraph where an exam was one of three options for complying with sex offender treatment and defendant was participating in another option. Order of the trial court reversed.

  • Commonwealth v. Miller

    Publication Date: 2024-01-15
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 459 WDA 2023

    Victim's ability to get a clear view of defendant over a period of several minutes, which enabled the victim to subsequently accurately describe defendant's appearance, created an independent basis to permit an in-court identification despite police suggestively showing the victim a single photo of defendant. Order of the trial court reversed, case remanded.

  • Commonwealth v. Johnson

    Publication Date: 2024-01-08
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Chester County
    Judge: Judge Rovito
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 408-2022

    Impaired driving defendant moved to suppress evidence of his vehicle stop by a Pennsylvania State Trooper. The court granted the motion where defendant's three momentary and minor touches of painted lane lines over the course of three minutes on a dark and winding road did not establish reasonable suspicion that he was driving under the influence.

  • Commonwealth v. Fletcher

    Publication Date: 2024-01-08
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 144 WDA 2023

    Search warrant affidavit established probable cause where it described the child pornography materials uploaded by an IP address and verified the association of that address with the residence to be searched. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

  • In re Smith

    Publication Date: 2024-01-01
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge DuBow
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 2128 EDA 2022

    Appellant appealed the denial of her motions for return of her gun, which was confiscated after she pointed it at her neighbors, and court found record supported trial court's factual findings that Commonwealth met its burden of showing the property was used during the course of criminal activity. Affirmed.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Delaware County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • United States v. Harris

    Publication Date: 2024-01-01
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Circuit Judge Restrepo
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 17-1861

    Government sought rehearing en banc after appellant's enhanced Armed Career Criminal Act sentence was overturned and court found no judge who concurred in the decision asked for rehearing, a majority of the judges of the circuit in regular service had not voted for rehearing and denied the petition for rehearing en banc. Motion denied.

  • United States v. Amos

    Publication Date: 2024-01-01
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Circuit Judge Nygaard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-3298

    District court properly denied appellant's suppression motion because no seizure occurred when officers first spoke to appellant but he was seized when officers handcuffed him after he turned and ran and there was a reasonable basis to seize him based on his headlong flight, however district court erred in sentencing him to an enhanced sentence based on a prior Pennsylvania conviction for a "crime of violence." Affirmed in part and vacated in part.

  • Commonwealth v. Marmillion

    Publication Date: 2024-01-01
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Panella
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 99 MDA 2023

    Inadvertent omission of guilty finding in bench trial verdict was not the equivalent of a not-guilty verdict, enabling the trial court to correct its omission in the written verdict. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

  • United States v. Amos

    Publication Date: 2024-01-01
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Nygaard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Abigail E. Horn, Federal Community Defender Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, West Philadelphia, PA for appellant.
    for defendant: Anthony J. Carissimi, Timothy M. Stengel, Robert A. Zauzmer, Office of United States Attorney, Philadelphia, PA for appellee.

    Case Number: 20-3298

    Although officers displayed authority by blocking defendant and commanding him to stop, no seizure occurred where defendant's momentary pause followed by running from the officers meant he never complied with the officers' authority, and his flight gave the officers reasonable suspicion to detain him. Conviction affirmed, judgment of sentence vacated and remanded for resentencing.

  • Commonwealth v. Lapenna

    Publication Date: 2024-01-01
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 543 WDA 2023

    Appellant appealed the trial court's parole-revocation judgment of sentence after denial of appellant's motion for reconsideration. Appellant argued that because his maximum remaining sentence after parole revocation would be less than two years, he should have been recommitted to county, rather than state, prison. The court affirmed, holding that appellant was property recommitted to state prison on his original seven-year sentence after revocation of his parole.