Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 7/31/1996

Commonwealth v. Miles

Citations

681 A.2d 1295
545 Pa. 500
1996 Pa. LEXIS 1508

How courts have described this case

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

holding that prosecutor was permitted to refer to the defendants as “hunting animals of prey”
holding that the grave risk of death aggravator was established when defendant fired his gun while in a fight with four other people at a public shopping center
concluding that a prosecutor's comparison of the defendant's actions to the hunting style of \animals of prey\ \did not ... reveal his personal opinion of the defendant's guilt\ and was, in any event, harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
concluding [that the] prosecutor’s comparison of defendant’s actions to the hunting style of “animals of prey” was not improper
assuming Bruton violation, overwhelming evidence of guilt, including confession by defendant, made error harmless
following Commonwealth v. Lee, 541 Pa. 260, 662 A.2d 645 (1995)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nix, Flaherty, Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.