Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Neitzel

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 21, 1996Published

1Dissent

CIRILLO, President Judge Emeritus,

dissenting.

Despite the majority’s comprehensive statutory history of state and federal wildlife statutes, I believe that the appellant’s conviction should have been dismissed, and therefore, I respectfully dissent.

Our court has held that “a citation must include a specific section of the statute violated.” Commonwealth v. Cohen, 413 *15Pa.Super. 460, 463, 605 A.2d 814, 816 (1992) (emphasis added); Commonwealth v. Stahl, 296 Pa.Super. 507, 442 A.2d 1166 (1982). The Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure also state:

(A) Every citation shall contain:(6) a citation…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. AlstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Commonwealth v. StahlSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  3. Commonwealth v. CohenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. Commonwealth v. FryeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API