Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Erhart

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 29, 1977No. 1734PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAN der VOORT, Judge:

The appellant, William C. Erhart, was charged with forgery and receiving stolen goods. Prior to trial, he moved for a dismissal of all charges, alleging a violation of Rule 1100 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure. He claimed he had not been brought to trial within the required 180 day period mandated by the Rule. The Commonwealth answered the motion, claiming that appellant could not be located after the complaint was filed and thus to be deemed “unavailable” within the meaning of Rule 1100.

The lower court denied the appellant’s dismissal motion. At trial on…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BlairSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Commonwealth v. BaileySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GarbettSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Commonwealth v. RinierSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. Commonwealth v. LeamanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Commonwealth v. CameronSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Commonwealth v. ErhartSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

7 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