Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Ludwig

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 19, 2005No. 7 WAP 2002PublishedCited by 83 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Chief Justice CAPPY.1

This appeal presents a constitutional challenge to a criminal statute, 18 Pa.C.S. § 2506, “Drug delivery resulting in death,” for vagueness, because the statute fails to sufficiently set forth the mental state required for criminal liability. Additionally, we are called upon to determine whether the trial court erred in granting Appellee Gregory Ludwig’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus based upon the Commonwealth’s failure to establish a prima facie case under Section 2506. For the reasons that follow, we hold that Section 2506 is not unconstitutionally vague…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Smith v. GoguenSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. United States Civil Service Commission v. National Ass'n of Letter CarriersSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Commonwealth v. DrumSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
  5. Buffalo Township v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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

3Cited by83 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SantosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  2. In Re Fc IIISupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  3. Commonwealth v. WindsloweSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  4. Commonwealth v. ClaffeySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  5. Commonwealth v. PackerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

78 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