Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Reeves

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 31, 2006PublishedCited by 132 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY KLEIN, J.:

¶ 1 Charles Reeves was found guilty of securing execution of documents by deception, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4114, for inducing his attorney to file a claim with the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA), asserting he sustained injuries on a SEPTA trolley when it suddenly stopped. In fact, there were no passengers on the trolley when the power became disconnected. We affirm.

¶ 2 Reeves claims that the conviction should be overturned because SEPTA is not a “person” under section 4114. The Commonwealth claims that Reeves’ claim is waived because it was not mentioned in *2h…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Commonwealth v. DowlingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Lineberger v. WyethSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Kanter v. EpsteinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  5. Commonwealth v. LemonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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

3Cited by132 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HansleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  2. Commonwealth v. ProctorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  3. Majorsky v. DouglasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  4. Commonwealth v. JohnsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  5. Commonwealth v. BarberSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007

127 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