Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Polo

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 2, 2000PublishedCited by 67 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ZAPPALA, Justice.

This case presents the issue of whether the Pennsylvania Constitution prohibits the random stopping of a vehicle to conduct a drug interdiction investigation in the absence of reasonable suspicion or probable cause.1 We conclude that *221such a stop is unlawful under Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. For the following reasons, we affirm Superior Court’s order suppressing the evidence obtained during the course of the investigation.

On September 22,1995, a Greyhound bus on which Appellee was a passenger approached the tollbooth at the Delaware Water Gap…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Commonwealth v. EdmundsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Commonwealth v. SellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Commonwealth v. MatosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Commonwealth v. SwangerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973

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

3Cited by67 opinions

  1. In the Interest of D.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  2. Commonwealth v. ChaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. Jones v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Commonwealth v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  5. Commonwealth v. BeasleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

62 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