Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Smalis

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 24, 1984No. 12 to 15, 45 to 48PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

The trial court in this criminal action sustained defense demurrers to charges of murder, voluntary manslaughter and causing a catastrophe. The Commonwealth appealed. We do not reach the substantive merits of the appeal. Principles of double jeopardy, as interpreted and applied by recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, *311bar the Commonwealth’s right of appeal and compel us to quash the appeal.

Despina Smalis and Ernest Smalis were the owners of a building in the Oakland section of Pittsburgh which housed a bar and restaurant known as “Chances R” and seven…

2Cases cited54 opinions

  1. Burks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Tibbs v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Greene v. MasseySupreme Court of the United States · 1978

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Smalis v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. ZollerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Commonwealth v. MicklosSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Commonwealth v. McDonoughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  5. Lowe v. StateSupreme Court of Kansas · 1987

24 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