Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Flamer

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 6, 2012PublishedCited by 71 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

PANELLA, J.

Currently before us are two appeals by the Commonwealth from separate cases1 where the trial court denied part of the Commonwealth’s motion in limine. Before the trial of Appellees, Marvin Flamer and Nafeast Flamer, for the murder of Allen Moment, Jr., the Commonwealth filed a motion in limine■ to introduce evidence of the Appellees’ conspiracy to kill a Commonwealth witness, Abdul Taylor. After the trial court denied part of the Commonwealth’s motion in both cases, the Commonwealth appealed. The central issue presented in these appeals is whether the trial court abused…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. StorySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Commonwealth v. LarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Commonwealth v. PaddySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. Commonwealth v. CookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  5. Commonwealth v. DillonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007

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

3Cited by71 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. TalbertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  2. Commonwealth v. TyackSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  3. Commonwealth v. IvySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Commonwealth v. LeanerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  5. Commonwealth v. DiehlSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

66 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