Commonwealth v. Paul
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
BROSKY, Judge:
This interlocutory appeal by permission lies from an Order denying appellant’s Motion to compel his placement in the Bucks County A.R.D. program.
Three issues are presented for our review: (1) whether the District Attorney may refuse to submit a case for A.R.D. merely on the basis of the applicant’s involvement in a two-vehicle accident; (2) whether an unwritten, unpublished policy can be enforced in a criminal prosecution so as to deny an otherwise qualified applicant admission into the Bucks County A.R.D. program; and (3) whether a trial court may compel placement of a…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited17 opinions
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Perez. v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Tate v. ShortSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Breithaupt v. AbramSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- MacKey v. MontrymSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Gilles v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Commonwealth v. AgnewSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Commonwealth v. ChilcoteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Cain v. Darby BoroughCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Commonwealth v. BuonopaneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.