Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Potts

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 15, 1989No. 2846PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge:

On appeal appellant first questions whether his conviction for murder of the first degree based upon an accomplice liability theory was proper when it was based upon wholly circumstantial evidence. The second, third, and, fourth assignments of error charge that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the Commonwealth’s proceeding on an accomplice liability theory, for failing to preserve the objection that evidence of defendant’s prior bad acts should not have been admitted into evidence, and for failing to impeach a Commonwealth witness.

This is a direct appeal by…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. PierceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Commonwealth v. HughesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  3. Commonwealth v. BillaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. Commonwealth v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Commonwealth v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HuntSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  3. Sistrunk v. VaughnCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
  4. Commonwealth v. PageSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Commonwealth v. PeerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

24 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