Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Jones

Citations

  • 363 A.2d 1281
  • 242 Pa. Super. 303
  • 1976 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2067

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating, apparently inconsistently with its holding predisposition irrelevant to the entrapment defense, that “[ejvidence of a sale just two hours prior to the sale in question would be relevant on the issue of entrapment, and on appellant’s intent in general.” (Emphasis supplied
  • discussing ignorance, mistake, or duress as opposed to entrapment
  • 2 drug transactions hours apart consolidated
  • 2 drug transactions hours apart consolidated

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Cercone, Price, Van Voort Spaeth, Spaeth

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

20 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.