Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

982 A.2d 1218

Commonwealth v. Cannon

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 20, 2009

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2009-10-20

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently June 2011

4 state decisions

Relies on Bruton v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2009-10-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2 AND NOW, this 20th day of October, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Did the Superior Court override controlling authority establishing that in a joint trial, where the Commonwealth properly redacted a co-defendant’s statement and did not use it to directly establish defendant’s guilt, and where the trial court properly instructed the jury regarding that statement, the narrow exception to the presumption that a jury will follow its instructions established in Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. *1219 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), does not apply?
/982/a2d/1218 · .json · Public domain