Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 6/27/2011

Commonwealth v. Baker

Citations

24 A.3d 1006
2011 Pa. Super. 131
2011 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1097
2011 WL 2520214

How courts have described this case

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

holding that this Court need not remand for resentencing where “we have not upset the sentencing scheme consisting entirely of concurrent sentences.”
holding that “[h]aving failed to raise an objection before the trial court, Baker cannot now complain that the trial court erred in admitting the [SOAB member’s expert report at the SVP hearing] . . ..”
holding that “[h]aving failed to raise an objection before the trial court, Baker cannot now complain that the trial court erred in admitting the [SOAB member’s expert report at the SVP hearing] . . ..”
stating that that “the mere presence of an error in an affidavit of probable cause supporting a search warrant does not invalidate the warrant” unless it is a deliberate and material misstatement
noting that the defendant “was entitled to jury instructions on” voluntariness of confession in light of the fact that he tested the issue at trial and holding that the trial court adequately presented the relevant law in its instructions
holding claim not raised in 1925(b) statement is waived

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stevens, Shogan, Mundy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

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

Other cases with this 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.