Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Brady
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided March 26, 1986No. 72 E.D. Appeal Docket 1985PublishedCited by 166 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*125OPINION OF THE COURT
LARSEN, Justice.
We granted the Commonwealth’s petition for allowance of appeal to reconsider this Court’s long-standing rule that prior inconsistent statements of a non-party witness at trial cannot be used as substantive evidence to prove the truth of the matters asserted therein but may only be used for the limited purpose of impeaching the credibility of the witness. We now discard this antiquated rule and hold that such statements may be used as substantive evidence where the declarant is a witness at trial and available for cross-examination.
On September 14, 1980, the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- California v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Gibbons v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1982
- Di Carlo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- Commonwealth v. GeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- State v. SaporenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by166 opinions
- State v. SmithTennessee Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. WhelanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Commonwealth v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Commonwealth v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Commonwealth v. ChamberlainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
161 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.