Commonwealth v. Howard

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that, in all non-capital cases, the decision to permit defense counsel to conduct individual voir dire of prospective jurors “is a matter resting within the sound discretion of the trial judge”
• “It is clearly the law of this Commonwealth that indictments drawn in the language of the criminal statute are legally sufficient.” [Citations omitted]
• \It is clearly the law of this Commonwealth that indictments drawn in the language of the criminal statute are legally sufficient.\ [Citations omitted]
• escape abandoned when discovered by guards

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Wojdak
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1983-10-18· cited 133×
• Commonwealth v. Gore
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1978-12-29· cited 72×
• Commonwealth v. Hamm
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-02-17· cited 41×
• Commonwealth v. Dessus
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1979-08-13· cited 31×
• Commonwealth v. Martin
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1982-11-19· cited 17×
• Commonwealth v. Berrigan
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-06-27· cited 15×
• Commonwealth v. McNeill
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1981-12-04· cited 9×
• Commonwealth v. Rios
  Northampton County Court of Common Pleas· 1978-05-16
• Commonwealth v. Sunday
  Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas· 2010-06-21

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Herron
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1976-11-22· cited 33×
• Commonwealth v. Bradshaw
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1975-12-22· cited 24×
• Commonwealth v. McCloskey
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1975-06-24· cited 7×
• Commonwealth v. Tarabilda
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1972-09-15· cited 6×