Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 10/28/1977

Commonwealth v. Johnson

Citations

378 A.2d 859
474 Pa. 410
1977 Pa. LEXIS 817

How courts have described this case

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

noting that the admission of a defendant’s out-of-court statement during a joint trial only violates his co-defendant’s right of confrontation if the statement has some incriminating impact
noting that the admission of a defendant's out-of-court statement during a joint trial only violates his co-defendant's right of confrontation if the statement has some incriminating impact
“[i]f a confession can be edited so that it retains its narrative integrity and yet in no way refers to defendant, then use of it does not violate the principles of Bnuton.”
“If a confession can be edited so that it retains its narrative integrity and yet in no way refers to defendant, then use of it does not violate the principles of Bruton ”
“The basic theory of redaction seems sound. If a confession can be edited so that it retains its narrative integrity and yet in no way refers to defendant, then use of it does not violate the principles of Bruton.”
defendant may not assert personal rights of another

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Manderino, Packel

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

5 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.