Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Weigle

Citations

  • 949 A.2d 899
  • 2008 Pa. Super. 69
  • 2008 Pa. Super. LEXIS 583
  • 2008 WL 1759256

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that “the thrust of the REAP statute is to provide criminal sanctions for the reckless creation of a risk of death or serious bodily injury.”
  • holding REAP is not a cognate offense to robbery because it “could be accomplished without committing a robbery, and a robbery could be accomplished without committing [an offense] involving danger to the person.”
  • holding that robbery and retail theft are “not of the same class or category of offenses to be considered cognate” because, while the proof of theft was common to both crimes, “[r]obbery bears only a secondary relationship to theft but is principally directed at protection of the person”
  • acknowledging that while REAP and robbery are intended to protect part of the same harm, “i.e., protection against infliction of bodily injury or fear thereof[,] the robbery statute contains the additional goal of protection of property which REAP does not

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stevens, Melvin, Colville

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

19 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.