Commonwealth v. Mathis, D., Aplt.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHIEF JUSTICE SAYLOR. This discretionary appeal pertains to the authority of parole agents to detain and frisk a non-parolee visitor while performing a routine check at a .parolee’s home,. We also granted review to address whether reasonable suspicion existed to justify the seizure and frisk in this instance.
By way of background, state parole agents’ authority .and duties with respect to parolees are prescribed by two sections of the Prisons.and Parole Code.1 Section 6152 declares agents to be peace officers and provides them with police power to arrest without' warrant any parolee…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Florida v. RoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Whren v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Adams, E., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Commonwealth v. Hlubin, M., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Com. v. Wright, B.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2021
- Com. v. Rosendary, E.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2024
- Commonwealth v. PriceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.