Commonwealth v. Fromal
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Woodside, J.,
The appellant was found guilty by a jury on two charges of larceny and burglary, and he was sentenced to concurrent terms of 8 to 16 months in jail. The only question before us is whether it was error for the trial judge to deny the defendant’s counsel the right to examine a police file prepared by a Commonwealth witness who used it to refresh his recollection before coming into court.
A police detective, testifying without notes, was asked on cross-examination whether he had refreshed his recollection prior to trial. He replied that he had. Pressed further, it developed…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Jencks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Palermo v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Goldman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Commonwealth v. CaplanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- State v. CraytonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SamuelsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Commonwealth v. ProctorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Ford-Bey, W. v. Professional Anesthesia ServicesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
- Ford-Bey, W. v. Prosfessional Anesthesia ServicesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
- Lewandowski v. Joseph Horne Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.