Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Scott

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 20, 1980No. 2463PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPAETH, Judge:

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for dismissal of charges following appellant’s rearrest; after appellant’s first arrest, the same charges had been dismissed. Appellant argues that dismissal was required by Rule 141(d) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure, as it read before its recent amendment, 1 because the cost of the first prosecution had not been paid. The issue before us is whether Rule 141(d) required such cost to be paid prior to any second prosecution or only in cases where the first prosecution had been found to have been without probable…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HetheringtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Commonwealth v. DavenportSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Commonwealth v. CartagenaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Commonwealth v. FlandersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Robert Stewart v. Lynne AbrahamCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
  2. Stewart v. AbrahamCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
  3. Gravinese v. Johns-Manville Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. In Re the Interest of C.K.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Commonwealth v. MurraySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985

16 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