Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Wills

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 8, 1984No. 333, 341, 343, 403 and 417PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROSKY, Judge:

This appeal is from the denial of a motion to appoint a physician under 35 P.S. § 780-118(a). Appellants argue that the statute requires such an appointment. We do not reach the merits of that issue since the order appealed from is a non-appealable interlocutory order. Accordingly, the appeal is quashed.

On the day voir dire was to commence appellants made a motion for the appointment of a physician to examine appellants to recommend whether, as a result of drug addiction, they should be treated and rehabilitated rather than prosecuted. This motion was denied and an appeal was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Toll v. TollSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Gurnick v. Government Employees InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. Commonwealth v. PfenderSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  4. Commonwealth v. BennettSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Gellar v. ChambersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Vendale Coal Co. v. Voto Manufacturing Sales Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. StrangesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Commonwealth v. FeagleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  4. Commonwealth v. FeagleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Commonwealth v. StrangesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API