Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Davis

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 28, 1979No. 739PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRICE, Judge:

This appeal by the Commonwealth arises from the order of the court below suppressing two prospective in-court identifications of appellee. 1 For the reasons stated herein, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

Evidence adduced at the suppression hearing is as follows. At approximately 9:05 a. m. on November 23, 1976, three men entered the A&P Supermarket on Scranton Avenue in Wilkinsburg. One of the men held the head cashier, Rose Ference, at gunpoint and ordered her to open the cash register, whereupon he removed the available money. Concurrently, the second intruder compelled,…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Commonwealth v. BosurgiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  4. Bobby Russell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
  5. Commonwealth v. GarvinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GuessSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  2. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. Commonwealth v. ZabalaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Commonwealth v. KeatonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Commonwealth v. ZabalaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

4 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