Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 11/1/1999

Commonwealth v. Puksar

Citations

740 A.2d 219
559 Pa. 358
1999 Pa. LEXIS 3257

How courts have described this case

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

holding that out- of-court statement of victim that he would not pay defendant back for a model train set was admissible to establish motive for murder
explaining that, “[i]n general, a party may not object to improper testimony which he himself elicits”
reaching this conclusion even though that doctor “was not an expert in the field” of bloodstain pattern interpretation
contrary to right of trial by jury, it is clearly established that there is no absolute right to a bench trial
\Statements are admissible to establish ill-will or motive where they are not being offered for the truth of the matter contained therein\
“statements are admissible to establish ill-will or motive where they are not being offered for the truth of the matter contained therein.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

25 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.