Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Griffin

Citations

  • 137 A.3d 605
  • 2016 Pa. Super. 81
  • 2016 WL 1391668
  • 2016 Pa. Super. LEXIS 212

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that “newspaper articles do not meet the definition of ‘evidence’ because they are merely the reporter’s version of facts and are not admissible at trial.”
  • explaining that, allegations or accusations contained in a criminal indictment, or criminal charges, are not evidence
  • stating that a federal civil rights complaint is a pleading asserting allegations or accusations and does not meet the definition of admissible, relevant evidence
  • explaining that, allegations or accusations contained in a criminal indictment, or criminal charges, are not evidence
  • finding that “allegations about an unrelated person in an unrelated case” did not constitute after-discovered evidence
  • stating that, even if the allegations contained in an indictment or criminal complaint were “evidence,” a petitioner would still not satisfy the after-discovered evidence test because the alleged evidence would be used solely for impeachment purposes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gantman, Mundy, Dubow

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.