Commonwealth v. Krut
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentJohnson, Judge
The majority today holds that in an appeal from a summary conviction before a magistrate, the court of common pleas is required to “determine the facts of the case and render [ed] a verdict”, even where the defendant fails to appear. Because I find no rational support for this conclusion in the law, and since the result cannot but have an adverse effect upon the administration of our criminal justice system, I must dissent.
The hearings on the statutory appeals were, on November 13, 1980, scheduled for trial de novo in the court of common pleas on January 6, 1981 before the then statutory…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Commonwealth v. KochSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Commonwealth v. KollockSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Dile v. DileSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Marine Bank v. HuhtaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Commonwealth v. CarterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.