Commonwealth v. Colon

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 defendant was placed in official detention when two police officers approached him and told him that he was under arrest, as the defendant could not reasonably have believed that he was free to leave
• concluding that, “[a]t the point [Colon] had been informed [that] the officers had a warrant for his arrest and that he was under arrest, [he] was detained by a show of authority whereby he could not reasonably believe he was free to leave”
• noting that a warrant for arrest completes a required element of official detention
• noting that a warrant for arrest completes a required element of official detention
• “It is the warrant which extends the power of the state over the [appellant], - 12 - J-S37022-16 beyond the mere assertion he is under arrest, and completes the required element of official detention necessary to constitute the crime of escape.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. Hopkins
  Third Circuit· 2009-08-21· cited 48×
• Commonwealth v. Wegley
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-08-06· cited 34×
• Commonwealth v. Fountain
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2002-11-12· cited 28×
• Commonwealth v. Santana
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2008-10-17· cited 10×
• Commonwealth v. Wegley
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2002-02-06· cited 4×