Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Enders

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 30, 1991No. 1882, 2030, 2123 and 2199PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MONTEMURO, Judge:

These unconsolidated appeals arise from the judgments of sentence entered after a jury trial at which all appellants, Jason L. Enders, Scott Francis Liptak, Alexander 0. Stein-berg and Daniel Nelson, were convicted of false imprison ment. 1 The charges stemmed from appellants’ participation in a satanic cult ritual. After all appellants’ post-verdict motions were denied, sentences were imposed. 2 It is from these sentences that the instant appeals are taken.

Appellants, collectively and individually, raise four (4) issues for our consideration. Generally, it is alleged that:…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ClairSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Commonwealth v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Commonwealth v. NelsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Commonwealth v. HolmesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  5. Commonwealth v. UlatoskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DiStefanoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  2. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Commonwealth v. KimSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Commonwealth v. DaysSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  5. Commonwealth v. Derby, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, York County1994

2 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