Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Young

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 18, 1997No. 00167PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SCHILLER, Judge.

Circumstantial evidence, when properly marshalled, can be powerful enough to sustain the Commonwealth’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. While the lack of a weapon or other piece of evidence can often prove grist for novelists’ plots, in real life these deficiencies can be overcome by sufficient circumstantial proof of guilt.

FACTS:

On July 22, 1994, appellant, Allen C. Young, was in attendance at “dollar night” at a bar located in Conshohocken, Montgomery County. The victim in this ease, one Ranielle Ricard, was in attendance and, at one point during the night,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. PaquetteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. Commonwealth v. NelsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. Commonwealth v. ZapataSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  5. Commonwealth v. PronkoskieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BruceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  2. Commonwealth v. KnoxSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Commonwealth v. StokesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Commonwealth v. SantiagoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Commonwealth v. KearnsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

15 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