Commonwealth v. Metts

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[i]t is [the a]ppellant’s duty to provide a complete record to facilitate - 21 - J-S42042-20 meaningful appellate review.”
• allowing testimony regarding the substance of a conversation where the recording of the conversation had been suppressed and witness was \thoroughly cross-examined regarding his ability to recall the conversations\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Lopez v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1963-05-27· cited 983×
• Commonwealth v. Smith
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-09-18· cited 264×
• Commonwealth v. LaCava
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1995-09-19· cited 252×
• Commonwealth v. Fletcher
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-03-24· cited 144×
• Commonwealth v. Mulholland
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1997-10-10· cited 117×
• Commonwealth v. Brion
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1994-12-30· cited 107×
• Commonwealth v. Phinn
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-10-16· cited 80×
• Commonwealth v. Schaeffer
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-12-29· cited 76×
• Commonwealth v. Chopak
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-09-30· cited 56×
• Commonwealth v. Brachbill
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-03-06· cited 36×
• Commonwealth v. Ardestani
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1999-06-29· cited 36×
• Commonwealth v. Carlson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1998-01-13· cited 16×
• Commonwealth v. Garcia
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-02-02· cited 7×
• Commonwealth v. Laney
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1999-04-06· cited 5×
• Commonwealth v. Darush
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1999-09-27· cited 3×
• Commonwealth v. Bannister
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1995-03-20· cited 1×