Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Kline

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 19, 1997PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HESTER, Judge:

David S. Kline appeals from the April 2, 1996 judgment of sentence imposed by the Centre County Court of Common Pleas following his plea of guilty to simple assault. Appellant maintains the sentencing court violated the ex post facto clause of the United States Constitution by imposing restitution under the revisions to 18 Pa.C.S. § 1106 which allow an award of restitution in favor of an insurance company. We conclude that restitution is not punishment within the meaning of the ex post facto clause. Therefore, we affirm the restitution award even though the permissible amount…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
  5. United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Dial v. VaughnCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. Commonwealth v. DavisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Commonwealth v. RichardsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Commonwealth v. DerkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  5. Com. v. Shields, D.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

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

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

Powered by the Exa API