Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 3/29/1988

Commonwealth v. Smith

Citations

540 A.2d 246
518 Pa. 15
1988 Pa. LEXIS 102

How courts have described this case

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

finding that after- discovered evidence must be “producible and admissible” in order to be grounds for a new trial
stating that “[t]he purpose of the voir dire examination is not to provide a better basis upon which a defendant can exercise his peremptory challenges, but to determine whether any venireman has formed a fixed opinion as to the accused’s guilt or innocence”
focusing its inquiry on whether the initial verdict could have been based on \an issue other than that which the defendant seeks to foreclose from consideration.\
explaining trial court did not abuse its discretion when it permitted prosecution to admit prior consistent statements of witness in anticipation of announced defense before defense counsel had impeached witness on cross- examination
sufficient evidence to support (d)(7) where other people present on porch with victim could have been struck by errant ricochet
determination of juror bias involves credibility findings whose basis cannot be easily discerned from an appellate record

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nix, Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Zappala, Papadakos, Stout

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

76 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

48 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.