Commonwealth v. BOROVICHKA

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that suppression for violation of MPJA was not warranted where it would “run afoul of the legislative intent behind the MPJA, which is to promote public safety, not to hinder law enforcement and shield criminal behavior.”
• stating that the Section 3814 pre- sentence assessment must be ordered and completed prior to sentencing under Section 3802
• holding claim of error in admitting lab report was waived by the defendant’s failure to object to its admission
• stating, “[a] challenge to the legality of a sentence . . . may be entertained as long as the reviewing court has jurisdiction[]”
• stating, “[a] challenge to the legality of a sentence . . . may be entertained as long as the reviewing court has jurisdiction[ ]”
• stating, “a challenge to the legality of a sentence ... may be entertained as long as the reviewing court has jurisdiction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).