Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Ngow

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 16, 1993No. 00633PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge:

The single question on appeal is whether a baseball bat, which has not been specially made or adapted for criminal use, can be an instrument of crime as defined in 18 Pa.C.S. § 907(c)(2). We agree with the trial court and hold that a baseball bat can be an instrument of crime as defined in the Pennsylvania Code. We affirm the judgment of sentence.

Appellant was arrested and charged with aggravated and simple assault, indecent assault, recklessly endangering another person, possessing an instrument of crime and criminal conspiracy. Appellant was found guilty on all counts. A motion…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HudgensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Commonwealth v. MyersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Commonwealth v. DalahanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. Commonwealth v. SenyszynSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Commonwealth v. HallSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. FosterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Commonwealth v. VidaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  3. Commonwealth v. NgowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. FosterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Commonwealth v. NgowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

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