Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 6/15/1979

Commonwealth v. Schwartz

Citations

406 A.2d 573
267 Pa. Super. 170
1979 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2462

How courts have described this case

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

vacating sentence where sentencing court noted consideration of a television program that had aired about the defendant
trial court may have improperly considered information learned from a television program
remanded for resentencing with order that resentencing before different judge should be considered if judge had seen television show about defendant; if judge did see show, must place on record why his impartiality could not reasonably be called into question
remanded for resentencing with order that resentencing before different judge should be considered if judge had seen television show about defendant; if judge did see show, must place on record why his impartiality could not reasonably be called into question
judge “heard something about” defendant on television

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cercone, Hester and Hoffman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

3 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.