Commonwealth v. Lapia
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCirillo, Judge
I concur in the result reached by the majority in Commonwealth v. Lapia, and I respectfully dissent from the majority holding in Commonwealth v. Dugger. Initially, I express my view that the holdings of this Court in Commonwealth v. Trefry, 249 Pa.Super. 117, 375 A.2d 786 (1977), and Commonwealth v. Deren, 233 Pa.Super. 373, 337 A.2d 600 (1975) should remain extant.
The majority concludes that we must determine for ourselves, on the basis of the record alone, whether an order suppressing evidence is appealable. The record of a suppression hearing, though, contains only the evidence adduced at…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BosurgiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Commonwealth v. DerenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Commonwealth v. TrefrySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Commonwealth v. ThorneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1972