Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Hamme

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 13, 1990No. 107PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

This appeal is from an order granting appellee’s motion to quash. Appellant, the Commonwealth, contends that the court below erred in suppressing certain evidence and granting the motion. For the following reasons, we agree, and accordingly, we reverse the order below and remand for trial.

The facts surrounding appellee’s arrest, viewed in the light most favorable to appellee, 1 are as follows. On October 27, 1989, Officer Hinds of the West Manchester Police Department was traveling through West York Borough when he observed a vehicle, driven by appellee, exiting a parking lot.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. United States v. CrewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Commonwealth v. HicksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  4. Commonwealth v. HamlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  5. Commonwealth v. BensonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GommerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  2. Ankele v. HambrickDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Commonwealth v. RaganSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Commonwealth v. ZiegelmeierSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

16 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