Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. O'Shea
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 27, 1984No. 2807, 2808, 2809 and 2810PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SPAETH, President Judge:
This is an appeal by the Commonwealth from an order suppressing evidence. Finding the affidavit on which the search warrant was issued sufficient to establish probable cause, we reverse and remand for trial.
Each of appellees, Tannhauser, Joensuu, O’Shea, and Roth, is charged with possession of a controlled substance, possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, delivery of a controlled substance, and criminal conspiracy. The charges arise from a search of the Roth residence. The search was conducted pursuant to a warrant and led to the seizure of, inter…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SchaefferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Commonwealth v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Commonwealth v. O'SheaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Commonwealth v. SchaefferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Commonwealth v. Wiggins, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.