Legal Opinion
In re Maglisco
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 19, 1985No. Nos. 350 and 528PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BROSKY, Judge:
These consolidated appeals are from the forfeiture of a pistol and several rifles. Appellant contends that the forfeiture was improper. As to the rifles, we agree and reverse; as to the pistol, we affirm.
The relevant facts are as follows. Appellant Maglisco shot her husband with a .38 caliber revolver. The pistol was seized by the police when they arrived on the scene to arrest her. A few hours later, the police returned and confiscated several rifles in her possession. Charges were later dropped. At the forfeiture proceeding,1 it was alleged that the rifles belonged to…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- United States v. United States Coin & CurrencySupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Commonwealth v. LandySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Commonwealth v. FassnachtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Commonwealth v. JandaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
- Commonwealth v. GiffinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Commonwealth v. One 1988 Ford Coupe Vin 1FABP41A9JF143651Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Commonwealth v. DurhamSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Commonwealth v. CrosbySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.