Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Figueroa

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 18, 1997Published

1DissentOlszewski, Judge

I believe that the trial court in the instant matter was authorized to require restitution compensation to the Department of Corrections. Therefore, I respectfully dissent.

Initially, I believe that the majority has misapprehended the predominate issue in this case. This case does not turn upon whether the Department of Corrections qualifies as a “victim” pursuant to subsection (c)(l)(ii)(A) of the restitution statute. Rather, in accordance with the cannons of statutory construction, this case requires the Court to interpret all of the provisions of section (c) of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 1106. See…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. YanoffSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Commonwealth v. LopezSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. Commonwealth v. RunionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. WoodSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. Commonwealth, Department of Public Welfare, Farview State Hospital v. KallingerCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

3 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