Commonwealth v. Reed

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in deciding that the “re- reading of the victim’s testimony was unnecessary and potentially prejudicial to appellant because it might seemingly place undue emphasis on the victim’s testimony[]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Taylor
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1991-09-04· cited 10×
• Commonwealth v. Coley
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1982-04-02· cited 5×
• Commonwealth v. Elmore
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1983-12-30· cited 3×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Brown
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1975-07-07· cited 138×
• Commonwealth v. Scott
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1976-10-20· cited 134×
• Commonwealth v. Peterman
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1968-08-06· cited 58×
• Commonwealth v. Fontaine
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1956-12-28· cited 17×
• Commonwealth v. Ross
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1959-07-03· cited 15×