Commonwealth v. Eichler

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that the Superior Court “must follow the United States Supreme Court’s interpretation of the federal Constitution”
• concluding the defendant’s truck, which was parked several feet from his home, “clearly was within the curtilage.”
• noting that Section 3802(a)(1), which sets forth the DUI—general impairment offense “does not include ‘two hour’ language,” and, as such, “evidence of blood tests taken more than two hours after driving is admissible under subsection (a)(1
• noting officers may enter curtilage in the course of legitimate investigations, if they confine the search to areas visitors may reasonably be expected to go
• declining to consider property-based principles where the appellant challenged the police officer’s actions only under expectation-of-privacy principles
• stating DUI is an “at the time of driving” offense, but not limiting how the Commonwealth may sustain its burden

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).