COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOYCE LILLIAN NEWTON

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOYCE LILLIAN NEWTON No. 1298 MDA 2009 2010 PA Super 75 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 4/30/2010
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered on April 13, 2009, in the Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-49-CR-0000384-2004 and CR-0000061-04.
Before: ALLEN, LAZARUS and OLSON, JJ.
Opinion by: OLSON, J.
Appellant, Joyce Lillian Newton, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on April 13, 2009. We affirm in part and vacate in part.

-----------------------------------------------------Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. BRIAN HUGHES

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. BRIAN HUGHES No. 177 MDA 2009 2009 PA Super 240 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/14/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered on January 20, 2009, in the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County, Criminal Division, at No(s). CP-38-CR-0002319-2006
Before: ALLEN, FITZGERALD, and HUDOCK, JJ.
Opinion by: HUDOCK, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, Brian Hughes, appeals from the order dated January 20, 2009, dismissing his first petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. We affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. TAMMY SNEATH GRIMES

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. TAMMY SNEATH GRIMES No. 490 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 193 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/30/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence February 22, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County Criminal Division at No. CP-07-CR-0002060-2006
Before: BENDER, BOWES and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Tammy Sneath Grimes, Appellant, appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed after she was convicted by a jury on December 14, 2007, of theft and receiving stolen property. Appellant raises four issues for our review: (1) Whether the trial court erred in denying Appellant the use of the justification defense; (2) Whether the trial court erred in precluding the testimony from two defense experts; (3) Whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the issue of intent for the theft crime; and (4) Whether the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing Appellant. We affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here