Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Smith

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 3, 1981No. 2462PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROSKY, Judge:

Appellant was convicted of robbery, possession of instruments of a crime and conspiracy. Post-trial motions alleged that certain questions asked veniremen at voir dire were improper. Smith requested the trial notes of testimony and record of jury voir dire. He was granted the former but denied the latter. On May 26, 1978, after trial, appellant filed an application of supersedeas and writ of prohibition or mandamus with the Superior Court requesting we order the notes of voir dire transcribed. We denied that request. Appellant was sentenced to ten (10) to twenty (20) years for…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Griffin v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  2. Commonwealth v. LopinsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  3. Commonwealth. v. HossSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  4. Commonwealth v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Commonwealth v. McGrewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BerriganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Commonwealth v. BallemSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Commonwealth v. LyonsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Com. v. Lopez, G.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  5. Commonwealth v. BerriganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

1 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