Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 12/17/2008

Commonwealth v. Samuel

Citations

961 A.2d 57
599 Pa. 166
2008 Pa. LEXIS 2262

How courts have described this case

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

rejecting claim that “person present” and “structure adapted for overnight accommodations” elements had to be charged in the bill of information and holding that sentencing court determines whether defendant convicted of crime of violence under two strikes law
“The proposal of special verdicts in criminal trials to determine what issues the jury actually resolved has been almost universally condemned.”
“The proposal of special verdicts in criminal trials to determine what issues the jury actually resolved has been almost universally condemned.”
“Special verdicts in which the finder of fact makes specific findings beyond guilty or not guilty are impermissible in Pennsylvania criminal cases.”
use of interrogatories not proper to determine whether burglary was a crime of violence under the two strikes statute, which required that the issue be decided by the judge at sentencing
“we hold that . . . whether a defendant -5- J-S82003-18 has been convicted of burglary of a structure adapted for overnight accommodation in which at the time of the offense any person is present [] is to be determined by the sentencing court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Castille, Saylor, Eakin, Baer, Todd, McCaffery

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.