Commonwealth v. Dixon

How courts have described this case

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

• providing that the Commonwealth need not present testimony addressing anything beyond the specific grounds asserted in the suppression motion
• affirming that sentences for violations of Section 6105(a) and Section 6106(a
• conducting merger analysis for convictions under Sections 6105 and 6106 and observing no distinction between “possesses” and “carries”
• officer had probable cause to arrest following his observance of a hand-to-hand exchange on a public street at midday where officer had made forty drug arrests in the immediate vicinity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Foster
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2011-03-29· cited 138×
• Commonwealth v. Janda
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2011-02-10· cited 120×
• Com. v. Carmenates, V.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2021-12-14· cited 46×
• Commonwealth v. Jones
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-07-17· cited 44×
• Commonwealth v. McLaurin
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2012-05-25· cited 35×
• Commonwealth v. Waddell
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2012-11-21· cited 27×
• Commonwealth v. Weatherill
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2011-07-08· cited 24×
• Com. v. Young, B.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2022-12-23· cited 19×
• Commonwealth v. Shabazz
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2011-04-18· cited 14×
• Commonwealth v. Sperber
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-12-12· cited 12×
• Commonwealth v. Romero
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2016-04-19· cited 8×
• Com. v. Echols, T.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-01-17
• Com. v. Hoyle, N.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2025-05-16
• Commonwealth v. Muhammad, R., Aplt.
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2025-05-30