Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Williamson

Citations

  • 962 A.2d 1200
  • 2008 Pa. Super. 276
  • 2008 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3971
  • 2008 WL 5069837

How courts have described this case

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

  • interpreting Section 3802(d)(2) as addressing the effect, rather than the quantity, of a drug in a defendant’s blood or urine
  • Subsection (d)(2) “does not require that any amount or specific quantity of the drug be proven in order to successfully prosecute under that section”
  • testimony of erratic driving and intoxicated demeanor, coupled with proof that drugs were present, were together sufficient to prove that operator’s ability to drive safely was impaired

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Musmanno, Melvin, Klein

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 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.