Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Commonwealth v. 1997 Chevrolet

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 17, 2014Published

1Concurrence

*872CONCURRING OPINION by

President Judge PELLEGRINI.

While I join in the well-reasoned majority opinion, I write separately to address the issue of whether the Commonwealth must meet its burden to forfeit property by “clear and convincing” evidence or merely by the “preponderance of the evidence” standard of proof.

I acknowledge that it is not necessary to address this issue because of the way that this case has been resolved, and I also understand that we do not normally address issues not before us, even constitutional issues. However, we asked the parties to address this issue in their briefs…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  5. Austin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993

19 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