Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Trotman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 29, 1980No. 782PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The Commonwealth, appellant herein, contends that the lower court erred in granting appellee’s motion to suppress certain physical evidence and statements on the basis that they had been obtained as a result of an illegal search. Appellee has filed a motion to quash this appeal. For the reasons which follow, we grant appellee’s motion.

“It is settled that the Commonwealth may only appeal from a pretrial suppression order if the question raised by the order is a pure question of law, and if the order effectively terminates or substantially handicaps the prosecution .. . .” Commonwealth v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BosurgiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Commonwealth v. TrefrySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Commonwealth v. KunkelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Commonwealth v. DeFeliceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Commonwealth v. MartzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. RutiglianoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Commonwealth v. MontgomerySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API