Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Neiman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 16, 2013PublishedCited by 164 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice TODD.

In this appeal, we consider whether Act 152 of 2004 (“Act 152”),1 which makes various amendments to the Judicial Code,2 violates the “single subject” rule of Article III, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution,3 and, if so, whether the portions of Act 152 amending Pennsylvania’s “Megan’s Law” may be severed from the other provisions of Act 152 and remain in force. For reasons detailed at greater length herein, we conclude that Act 152 does violate Article III, Section 8, since its various provisions do not all relate to a single unifying subject. Further, we hold that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. City of Philadelphia v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Pennsylvanians Against Gambling Expansion Fund, Inc. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. Stilp v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Commonwealth v. BarnettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
  5. Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009

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

3Cited by164 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Muniz, J., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. Commonwealth v. ThompsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Commonwealth v. PrendesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. Commonwealth v. BetheaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  5. Commonwealth v. FortsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

159 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