Commonwealth v. Lockhart
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hoffman, J.,
Appellant sets forth numerous allegations of errors, all of which, on the state of the record, we must dismiss as either waived or insufficiently established.
Briefly, Officer Scott of the Philadelphia Police, acting as an undercover agent, approached the appellant who was called “Frog”, and asked him “What’s happening?” The appellant took Scott to his apartment at 2022 Haggert Street, using a key to enter the premises, and sold Mm a packet later identified as heroin. Scott reported the incident to Ms superiors, and provided the police with a physical description of the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Linkletter v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Tehan v. United States ex rel. ShottSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ContiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Commonwealth v. GrantSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Commonwealth v. FrankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Commonwealth v. FosterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Commonwealth v. SchorkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.