Commonwealth v. Smith, J.
Commonwealth v. Smith, J.
169 A.3d 1067
(Atlantic Reporter, Third Series)
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Smith, J. (Pa. 2018)
- Com. v. Raspatello, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
ORDER
AND NOW, this 26th day of July, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner are:
(1) The Pennsylvania Superior Court’s Opinion misapplies the Deadly Weapon Used enhancement, which leads to a result inconsistent with statutory construction by reading an additional specific intent element into the Deadly Weapon Used statute that does not exist in the plain language[.]
(2) The Pennsylvania Superior Court rendered a decision that is inconsistent with the plain language of Commonwealth v. Buterbaugh, infra, and thereby leads to a misapplication of Buterbaugh and an irreconcilable conflict between Superior Court case law[.]
(3)The Pennsylvania Superior Court’s decision is inconsistent with fundamental notions of mens rea and the applicability of mens rea when no mens rea is specifically stated, improperly creating a default mens rea of specific intent.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.