Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Nelson

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 4, 1983No. 488Published

1Dissent

*495CERCONE, President Judge:

I dissent.

While I agree with the majority that there are many ways by which the Commonwealth might have proved appellant’s age, I do not find these to be dispositive of appellant’s contention in the instant case, where the trial judge, sitting as a factfinder, specifically and singly listed appellant’s pre-trial colloquy as the court’s basis for finding appellant to be over eighteen. Though the general rule is that a judge, as factfinder, is presumed to disregard inadmissible evidence and consider only competent evidence, Commonwealth v. Davis, 491 Pa. 363, 421 A.2d…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Commonwealth v. StorySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. Commonwealth v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  4. Commonwealth v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Commonwealth v. LawsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

4 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