Commonwealth v. Smith
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CAPPY, Justice.
We granted allocatur in this matter to determine whether the trial court erred in rejecting a consent asset forfeiture order on the basis that the Commonwealth did not file a written petition for forfeiture. For the reasons that follow, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in rejecting the consent forfeiture order. Accordingly, we affirm the Superior Court’s order reversing the trial court.
The underlying proceedings can be briefly summarized as follows. On February 1, 1996, the police received information from a confidential informant that appellant, Keala…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Commonwealth v. WidmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Morrison v. Com., Dept. of Pub. WelfareSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Commonwealth v. VasquezSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- In Re Upset Sale, Tax Cl. Bureau of BerksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Bureau of Traffic Safety v. LeaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Beaston v. EbersoleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Commonwealth v. One 1991 Cadillac SevilleCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Commonwealth v. All that Certain Lot or Parcel of Land Located at 605 University DriveCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Commonwealth v. Real Property & Improvements at 2338 N. Beechwood StreetCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Commonwealth v. JacksonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.