Commonwealth v. Friedman
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
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
- Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Commonwealth v. BoydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Commonwealth v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Commonwealth v. MorinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. FortuneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Commonwealth v. WhiteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Commonwealth v. FortuneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Commonwealth v. FortuneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Commonwealth v. WhiteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.