Commonwealth v. Evers
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentBrosky, Judge
Upon considerable review of the majority opinion I find their conclusiori that: “[I]n this Commonwealth, the consti*577tutional protections of the double jeopardy clause are not implicated where a felony or misdemeanor prosecution is preceded by a conviction before a district justice, whether by summary trial or guilty plea, for a summary offense.” constitutes a misguided deduction from and analysis of, relevant case law which I cannot support with my joinder. Consequently, I dissent.
The majority’s arrival at the above stated conclusion is not startling or even difficult to understand in light of…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Missouri v. HunterSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Whalen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Illinois v. VitaleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.