Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Bennett
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided January 12, 1982No. 2050PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOFFMAN, Judge:
This case requires us to decide whether a statement obtained from an accused in violation of the six-hour rule of Commonwealth v. Davenport, 471 Pa. 278, 370 A.2d 301 (1977), and therefore inadmissible in the Commonwealth’s case-in-chief, may be used to impeach the accused’s trial testimony. We conclude that such a statement may be used for impeachment purposes.
On February 1,1979, at 9:45 p. m., defendant-appellee was arrested and taken to the West Detective Division of the Philadelphia Police Department. At about 10:45 p. m., the police obtained a signed, written statement…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Oregon v. HassSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Walder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Commonwealth v. FutchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BennettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Commonwealth v. PalmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Commonwealth v. DevanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Commonwealth v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Commonwealth v. BennettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.