Legal Opinion

In the Interest of B.C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 10, 1996No. 422PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CIRILLO, President Judge Emeritus:

Appellant, B.C., was adjudicated delinquent for possessing a controlled substance1 following the denial of his motion to suppress evidence of thirty-three packets of crack cocaine. B.C. was placed on intensive drug and alcohol probation. In this appeal, B.C. alleges that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress because: (1) there was insufficient *299justification for the initial Terry2 stop; (2) the “frisk” exceeded the scope permitted by the “plain feel” doctrine articulated in Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 113 S.Ct. 2130, 124 L.Ed.2d 334…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. United States v. CortezSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. United States v. SokolowSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GaffneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. Commonwealth v. GrahamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  3. Commonwealth v. JacksonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. State v. WondersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1998
  5. Commonwealth v. GuillespieSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

26 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