Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Smith

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 14, 1980No. 412PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

Appellant contends that: 1) the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict; 2) the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence; 3) the statutory rule permitting rape convictions to stand on the uncorroborated testimony of the victim should be reformed; and 4) the trial court erred in barring spectators, including appellant’s mother, from the courtroom when the victim began to testify and in surrounding him with guards during the trial. We remand for a hearing to establish the facts regarding the court’s order to remove spectators from the courtroom during the trial.

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ClairSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Commonwealth v. TwiggsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Wiegand v. WiegandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  4. Commonwealth v. StevensSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Commonwealth v. MartinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BoernerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. Commonwealth v. CodySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Commonwealth v. PennSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Commonwealth v. CodySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API