Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Roebuck

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 31, 1996PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CAPPY, Justice.

This Court granted allocatur in order to review the burdens of proof and the proper procedures in applying the CarterRoviaro test1 to criminal prosecutions where a confidential informant is an eyewitness to the crime and the defendant seeks the disclosure of the informant’s identity for purposes of preparing a defense at trial.

Appellant, Nathaniel Roebuck, was charged -with two counts each of Possession of a Controlled Substance, 35 P.S. § 780-113 (a) (16), Possession with Intent to Deliver, 35 P.S. § 780-113 (a) (30), Delivery of a Controlled Substance, 35 P.S. §…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Roviaro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Commonwealth v. CarterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  3. Commonwealth v. ChristySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Henery v. ShadleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. Commonwealth v. BonasorteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Commonwealth v. MarshSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  3. Commonwealth v. BelenkySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Commonwealth v. WatsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  5. Commonwealth v. EllisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019

37 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