Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. De Marco

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 26, 1990No. Nos. 1297 and 1298PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KELLY, Judge:

In this case we are called upon to determine whether the trial court improperly suppressed an answering machine tape upon which incriminating information was recorded, based upon a conclusion that it was subject to statutory exclusion as the fruits of an unlawful interception under the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act. We are also asked to determine if the failure to include a certification of impairment in the notice of appeal is a fatal defect, or whether such an omission may be cured by submission of a separate certification statement.

*360We find that the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Evitts v. LuceySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Commonwealth v. BosurgiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  3. Commonwealth v. DuggerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Commonwealth v. AlbertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Matter of SylvesterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. RuderSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  3. Com. v. DeMarcoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Com. v. Kuder, W.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. Commonwealth v. Byrd, J., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

1 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