Commonwealth v. Baker
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentOrie Melvin, J.
I believe appellant’s conduct clearly constituted a threat and therefore violated the trial court’s order. Furthermore, I believe the majority’s holding eviscerates the purpose and goals of the Protection from Abuse Act, 23 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 6101-6118.
The issue in this case is whether appellant violated the PFA order by stating, “I’m going to kill this bitch.” The majority engages in a discussion of what constitutes a threat only to conclude, what is exceedingly obvious, that the instant statement “can be viewed as threatening in nature.” Despite this ac-knowledgement, the majority maintains that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. BaishDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- State v. AlstonHawaii Supreme Court · 1994
- Cipolla v. CipollaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Commonwealth v. AshfordSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Eichenlaub v. EichenlaubSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.