Commonwealth v. McMillan

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[s]ection 5704 does not contain temporal restrictions such as ‘ongoing,’ ‘current,’ or ‘contemporaneous,’” and that for a consensual wiretap, only a showing of reasonable grounds is -7- J-S52009-17 necessary

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Ruder
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2013-02-25· cited 45×
• Commonwealth v. Glass
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-12-03· cited 15×
• Com. v. Bellamy, A.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2021-05-14· cited 12×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Bomar
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-05-30· cited 478×
• Commonwealth v. Jones
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2010-02-16· cited 433×
• National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Transportation Communications Union
  Supreme Court· 1989-10-10· cited 28×
• Boettger v. Loverro
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-03-08· cited 23×
• Commonwealth v. Taylor
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1993-03-09· cited 14×
• Commonwealth v. Phillips
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-02-22· cited 12×
• Commonwealth v. Cruttenden
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-06-08· cited 9×
• Easton Publishing Co. v. Boettger
  Supreme Court· 1989-10-10· cited 6×