Legal Opinion

In the Interest of William M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 24, 1995PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROWLEY, President Judge:

The facts underlying this appeal are not in dispute. On October 26, 1993, at approximately 1:11 a.m., Police Officer Gerald McLaughlin, while patrolling in a marked police ear in the city of Philadelphia, observed appellee William M. sitting outside a restaurant. Believing appellee to be in violation of the city’s curfew ordinance, Officer McLaughlin stopped and asked appellee his age. When Officer McLaughlin ascertained appellee’s age, he determined that appellee was in fact in violation of the curfew ordi*159nance.1 Officer McLaughlin then searched appellee, whereupon he…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LovetteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. Commonwealth v. PincavitchSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  3. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Commonwealth v. HenrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  5. Commonwealth v. BullersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HaywardSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  2. Commonwealth v. RoseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Com. v. Jones, S.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  4. Com. v. Sierra, P.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API