Commonwealth v. Metz
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CAPPY, Justice.
We granted allocatur in this case to address the issue of whether the police had adequate reason to stop Appellant’s vehicle based upon his avoidance of a systematic roadblock. However, because we find that Appellant waived this issue, we do not reach it. Nor do we find it appropriate for the Superior Court to have reached it. Accordingly, we reject the reasoning of the Superior Court and affirm only the result of its Order affirming the judgment of sentence. 412 Pa.Super. 100, 602 A.2d 1328.
This appeal arises from the events of July 1, 1988, at…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Commonwealth v. GravelySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Commonwealth v. HolzerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Tagnani v. LewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Commonwealth v. MilyakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Commonwealth v. SpiewakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Womer v. HillikerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Commonwealth v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Sahutsky v. H.H. Knoebel SonsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- In the Interest of J.B., Appeal of: CommSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Lane Enterprises, Inc. v. L.B. Foster CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.