Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Commonwealth v. Stranges

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 24, 1990No. 3419Published

1ConcurrenceKelly, Judge

I join in the excellent majority opinion of Judge Johnson. I write separately to address briefly some additional matters raised by this case.

Jurisdiction

This case has been taken on direct appeal without allowance of interlocutory appeal by permission. Implicit in our exercise of jurisdiction in this case is a conclusion that an appeal from an order granting ARD over the Commonwealth’s objection is effectively final, even though an order granting ARD with the consent of the Commonwealth and the defendant is deemed interlocutory. Cf. Commonwealth *74v. Feagley, 371 Pa.Super. 593, 538 A.2d 895…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Fried v. FriedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Commonwealth v. LutzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Commonwealth v. KindnessSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Zarnecki v. ShepegiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

5 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