Commonwealth v. Seabrook
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
POMEROY, Justice.
In this appeal from a conviction for voluntary manslaughter 1 the principal issue 2 is whether the appellant was deprived of a fair trial on the merits because of the conduct of the judge presiding at the suppression hearing. We find appellant’s argument to be without merit, and affirm.
I
At the suppression hearing, Detective Herbert Winston testified that he read the warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966) to appellant from a standard “Miranda card” and entered her answers on a standard interview sheet.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Commonwealth v. KichlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Commonwealth v. MymaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Commonwealth v. PatskinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Commonwealth v. WattsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Commonwealth v. RaganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Commonwealth v. O'BryantSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Commonwealth v. TroopSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Shah v. State Board of MedicineCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Commonwealth v. BrittonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.