Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Phoenix

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 6, 1970No. Appeal, 176PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Appellant was tried and convicted of aggravated robbery. At his trial, he attempted to offer alibi testimony by his wife. Because he had not complied with the notice provisions of Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 312, his offer was excluded. He does not come within the “interest of justice” exception to Rule 312. Cf. Commonwealth v. Shider, 209 Pa. Superior Ct. 133, 224 A. 2d 802 (1966). Moreover, his contention that the Rule is unconstitutional is without foundation in the instant case. Commonwealth v. Vecchiolli, 208 Pa. Superior Ct. 483, 224 A. 2d 96 (1966). Cf.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Williams v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Commonwealth v. VecchiolliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  3. Commonwealth v. ShiderSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. OliverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  2. United States Ex Rel. Snyder v. MacKDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
  3. Commonwealth v. OliverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Commonwealth v. OliverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API