Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Namack

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 2, 1995PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge:

Appellant Thomas Namack challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for defiant trespass, 18 Pa.C.S. § 3503(b)(1). Upon review of the parties’ briefs, the record and the applicable law, we conclude that the evidence was insufficient to establish that appellant had the mens rea necessary to commit the crime of defiant trespass. We therefore reverse.

Appellant’s conviction arose from his use of a trail leading across property owned by complainant John McKay and McKay’s father and brothers, to the banks of the Delaware River. John McKay and his father William…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  2. Commonwealth v. DeWittSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  3. Commonwealth v. MaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. CarterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  5. Commonwealth v. DombrauskasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. WannerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. Commonwealth v. HamiltonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Com. v. Bradley, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
  4. Com. v. Coniker, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2023
  5. Commonwealth v. CrosbySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

35 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