Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Doty

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 16, 1985No. 1301PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

Donna Doty and Gary Kirkwood were tried nonjury and were convicted of criminal conspiracy and possession with intent to deliver hashish and marijuana. At trial, the Commonwealth relied upon incriminating evidence acquired by placing a tap on the telephone serving the residence of Gary and Linda Kirkwood. On direct appeal, the principal argument made by Doty and Kirkwood is that the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act of October 4, 1978, P.L. 831, No. 164, 1 is unconstitutional or, if valid, that it was improperly applied in this case. We disagree.…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Rawlings v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Scott v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Berger v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. United States v. GiordanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. United States v. KahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SchaefferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Commonwealth v. BirdseyeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  3. Commonwealth v. BurgosSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Commonwealth v. RiffertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Commonwealth v. PowellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

29 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