Sugalski v. Cochran
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
HOFFMAN, Judge:
This is an appeal from the lower court’s order granting appellee’s petition for return of property. Appellant contends that the lower court erred because the evidence was sufficient to establish that the seized property was derivative contraband and, thus, unlawfully possessed by appel-lee. After a careful review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties and the lower court’s opinion, we find that the appellant did not meet its burden of proof in this matter, Petition of Maglisco, 341 Pa.Superior Ct. 525, 531, 491 A.2d 1381, 1384 (1985), and affirm on the lower court’s…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Rosen v. Superintendent of Police Le StrangeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- In re MagliscoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Fairmount Engine Co. v. Montgomery CountySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Urban's AppealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Sugalski v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Commonwealth v. One 1985 Dark Blue Mercedes Benz CarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Commonwealth v. McDermondCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- In Re Return of Property Confiscated October 30, 1999 From 411 East Mac Dade BoulevardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.