Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Friedman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 27, 1979No. 2247PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

Appellant contends, inter alia, 1 that he should have a new trial because he was not informed during a waiver colloquy that he had a right to a trial by a jury chosen from members of his community. We agree and, accordingly, remand for a new trial.

On October 27,1977, Cheltenham Township police arrested appellant and charged him with violating various provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code. 2 The charges stemmed from a hit-and-run automobile accident in which a pedestrian was injured. On March 8, 1978, the following colloquy occurred:

“BY MR. McBRIEN [Defense Counsel]:
“…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Commonwealth v. BoydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  4. Commonwealth v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Commonwealth v. MorinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. FortuneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Commonwealth v. WhiteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  3. Commonwealth v. FortuneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  4. Commonwealth v. FortuneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Commonwealth v. WhiteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

1 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