Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Tate

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 7, 2001PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCavanaugh, J.

¶ 1 Kenneth Tate was convicted and given a modest sentence for the crime of luring a child into a motor vehicle (luring a child). The statute proscribes luring a child into a vehicle unless there is at least implied consent of the parent or if the child is in need of assistance. 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2910. This appeal raises two issues which challenge: 1) the charge of the court and, 2) the sufficiency of the evidence. The charges at trial arose out of the claim that Tate on separate, but closely similar, occasions lured two 14 year-old females, V.S. and I.B., into his vehicle. He was found guilty…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. MacKowick v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Commonwealth v. NatividadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Commonwealth v. FigueroaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  4. MacKowick v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Commonwealth v. McClintockSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. TateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Commonwealth v. HartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  3. Commonwealth v. HartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API