Commonwealth v. Gilbert
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
BECK, Judge:
The issue is whether the Commonwealth proved appellant’s intent to engage in disorderly conduct. We find that the Commonwealth has not produced sufficient facts to establish intent. We, therefore, vacate the judgment of sentence.
Appellant Earl Gilbert appeals his conviction for the summary offense of disorderly conduct. Gilbert was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct, making unreasonable noise, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5503(a)(2), when he openly disagreed with a police officer who intended to tow his neighbor’s car.
The record, viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- City of Houston v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Trustees of Dartmouth College v. WoodwardSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Commonwealth v. MastrangeloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Commonwealth v. KochSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Commonwealth v. LutesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Commonwealth v. TroySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth v. MaerzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Commonwealth v. ForreySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- McNeil v. City of EastonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.