Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Brady
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 23, 1986No. 127 E.D. Appeal Docket 1985PublishedCited by 107 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
NIX, Chief Justice.
The question here presented is whether an interlocutory appeal pursuant to Commonwealth v. Bolden, 472 Pa. 602, 373 A.2d 90 (1977), should be permitted from the denial of a motion to dismiss an information on double jeopardy grounds where the hearing court has determined the motion to be frivolous. Having fully considered that issue, we conclude that in such circumstances an interlocutory appeal is unwarranted and review must be sought by means of a direct appeal following retrial.
I
Appellee James Brady was charged with violating section 3731 of the…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. MacDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Commonwealth v. MayfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Commonwealth v. BoldenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by107 opinions
- Commonwealth v. FinleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Commonwealth v. ChmielSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Commonwealth v. BlakeneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Commonwealth v. MorrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth v. StatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
102 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.