Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Smith

Citations

  • 635 A.2d 1086
  • 431 Pa. Super. 91
  • 1993 Pa. Super. LEXIS 4168

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding evidence of prior crimes was admissible to show a recurring sequence of acts by defendant
  • holding evidence of prior crimes was admissible to show a recurring sequence of acts by defendant
  • holding evidence of prior crimes was admissible to show a recurring sequence of acts by defendant
  • holding evidence of prior crimes was admissible to show a recurring sequence of acts by defendant
  • stating that relevant to a finding of common scheme or plan, the court must examine “the habits or patterns of action or conduct undertaken by the perpetrator to commit crime, as well as the time, place, and types of victims typically chosen by the perpetrator”
  • \the issue of remoteness under the common plan exception is determined by analyzing the time involved between each of the criminal incidents\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Popovich, Johnson and Cercone

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 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.