Commonwealth v. Hammock
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
BROSKY, Judge:
This appeal is from judgment of sentence imposed subsequent to conviction for Murder in the First Degree and Possessing an Instrument of a Crime. On appeal appellant raises three issues. First, he argues that his demurrer should have been granted. Second, he argues that the M’Naghten Rule for determining legal insanity should be substituted with the Model Penal Code test. Third, he contends that the Commonwealth failed to prove that he was legally sane when the crimes were committed. We find these arguments to be either waived or without merit and, accordingly, affirm.
The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Commonwealth v. RobsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Commonwealth v. IlgenfritzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Commonwealth v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Commonwealth v. MetzlerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
3Cited by12 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ZambelliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Commonwealth v. MottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Commonwealth v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. SaccolSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. SalamehSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.