Commonwealth v. Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming PCRA court’s order requiring defendant to pay buy money to Commonwealth as cost of prosecution
• since the district attorney is chief law enforcement officer of the county unrecovered buy money used by officers fell within purview of Section 7708
• since district attorney is chief law enforcement officer of the county unrecovered buy money used by officers fell within purview of Section 7708
• “In that the district attorney is the chief law enforcement officer of a county, we believe that when a drug buy is arranged by police officers, these officers are proceeding in accordance with general directives from the district attorney of that county.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Garzone
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2010-04-14· cited 66×
• Commonwealth v. Garzone
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2010-04-13· cited 30×
• American Law Institute v. Commonwealth
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2006-07-20· cited 2×

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Boyd
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-11-03· cited 64×