Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 10/22/1993

Commonwealth v. Matthews

Citations

632 A.2d 570
429 Pa. Super. 291
1993 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3454

How courts have described this case

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

discussing, generally, physical signs of theft, lack of keys, defendant’s behavior, time elapsed since theft, and explanation for possession of a stolen vehicle as evidence supporting the mens rea for RSP
“[T]here must be additional evidence [beyond mere possession], circumstantial or direct, which would indicate that the defendant knew or had reason to know that the property was stolen.”
“[P]hysical manifestations of theft [include] signs of forced entry, broken ignition system, or obliterated vehicle identification number.”
record included evidence that vehicle’s owner’s home was burglarized, the keys to the vehicle were taken in the burglary, and the car was stolen
“[T]here must be additional evidence [beyond mere possession], circumstantial or direct, which would indicate that the defendant knew or had reason to know that the property was stolen.”
The Commonwealth may establish the necessary mens rea by showing whether the person in possession of the automobile “knew or had reason to believe the property was stolen”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kelly, Popovich, Brosky

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 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.