Commonwealth v. James

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 26, 2011

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2011-07-26

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 2013

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Whether the Superior Court ruled inconsistently with decisions of [this Court] and of other panels of [the] Superior Court by determining that the Commonwealth was limited to the four corners of the search warrant in meeting [appellee’s] contention that two trash pulls, which were relied upon in part to demonstrate probable cause for the issu- anee of the warrant herein, were illegally conducted?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Commonwealth v. James

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2011-07-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 *279 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2 AND NOW, this 26th day of July, 2011, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue is:

Whether the Superior Court ruled inconsistently with decisions of [this Court] and of other panels of [the] Superior Court by determining that the Commonwealth was limited to the four corners of the search warrant in meeting [respondent’s] contention that two trash pulls, which were relied upon in part to demonstrate probable cause for the issuance of the warrant herein, were illegally conducted?

¶3 Justice ORIE MELVIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.