Commonwealth v. Travers
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CASTILLE, Justice.
This Court granted allowance of appeal in this matter to consider whether the redaction of a non-testifying co-defendant’s confession in a joint trial, which replaced any direct reference to the defendant with the words “the other man,” when accompanied by an appropriate cautionary charge, was sufficient to protect the defendant’s Sixth Amendment confrontation clause rights under Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), and the United States Supreme Court’s more recent decision in Gray v. Maryland, 523 U.S. 185, 118 S.Ct. 1151, 140…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Richardson v. MarshSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Francis v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Gray v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Commonwealth v. KloiberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by79 opinions
- Commonwealth v. RaineySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Karim Eley v. Charles EricksonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Commonwealth v. FreemanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Commonwealth v. MarkmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Commonwealth v. AkbarSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.