Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Arter, K., Aplt.

Citations

  • 151 A.3d 149
  • 637 Pa. 541
  • 2016 Pa. LEXIS 2916

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the exclusionary rule applies to probation proceedings and that inadmissible evidence cannot be used to prove a probation violation
  • noting that grand jury proceedings “play a special role in the law enforcement process” and are non-adversarial
  • noting “this Court’s long-standing interpretation of Article I, Section 8 as embodying a strong individual privacy right”
  • exclusionary rule applied in probation revocation proceedings to evidence gathered by police officers that was suppressed in a criminal trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Saylor, Baer, Todd, Donohue, Dougherty, Wecht

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

53 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Commonwealth v. Arter, K., Aplt.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.