Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Santiago

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 20, 2017No. 1191 EDA 2016PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

BENDER, P.J.E.:

The Commonwealth appeals from the order granting Appellee’s, Angel Santiago, motion to suppress the in-court and out-of-court identification testimony of a police officer who, in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1 § 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, conducted a warrantless search of Appellee’s cell phone in order to ascertain his identity. The Commonwealth argues that a defendant’s identity is never suppressible, and that, as a result, eyewitness identification testimony is, categorically, never suppressible. After…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Brinegar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. Gerstein v. PughSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. Gilbert v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Santiago, A., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  2. Com. v. Dickerson, V.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  3. Com. v. Herder, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  4. Com. v. Reed, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. Commonwealth v. Katona, D., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

2 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