Commonwealth v. McElhenny
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
BROSKY, Judge:
This appeal is taken from judgment of sentence imposed for conviction of third degree murder. The only issue raised which will be addressed here is whether the admission at trial of evidence which was inadmissible at the time the crime was committed violates the ex post facto clauses of the Constitutions of the Commonwealth and of these United States. 1 We find that there is no such violation and, accordingly, affirm. 2
The evidence in question here is a tape recording of a telephone call made by appellant to the police emergency number. Appellant made some incriminating…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
- Hopt v. People of Territory of UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Commonwealth v. BlairSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Thompson v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Commonwealth v. HoetzelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. AllshouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Commonwealth v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Commonwealth v. AllshouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- State v. StevensMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
- Commonwealth v. AllshouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.