Commonwealth v. Karash
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
*8OPINION
NIX, Chief Justice.
We are here called upon to address appellant’s contention that a request for removal of a prisoner from a holding facility for the purpose of transporting him to police headquarters for custodial interrogation is a “critical stage” under federal constitutional law1 and should not be permitted without a prior counselled adversarial hearing. Appellant argues that the entitlement to the presence of counsel between his arraignment and preliminary hearing is dictated by fundamental fairness and therefore concludes from that premise that the presence of counsel must be…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BomarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth v. SherwoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Commonwealth v. KeatonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Commonwealth v. MooseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Commonwealth v. MayhueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.