Superior Court - ESTATE OF MATTHEW CONSIDINE v. WACHOVIA BANK AND ROBERT E. ROZINSKI

ESTATE OF MATTHEW CONSIDINE v. WACHOVIA BANK AND ROBERT E. ROZINSKI No. 3191 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 21 Atlantic: 966 A.2d 1148 Filed: 2/4/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered November 7, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Civil No. 05-15251
Before: SHOGAN, KELLY, JJ. & McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: KELLY, J.
The estate of Matthew Considine, Appellant, has filed an appeal from the order entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County granting Appellee Robert Rozinski’s motion for summary judgment. We quash, finding that we do not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DAVID PAGE

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DAVID PAGE No. 451 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 20 Atlantic: 965 A.2d 1212 Filed: 2/3/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence February 28, 2008, In the Court of Common Pleas of Lawrence County, Criminal at No. 442/06
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., FREEDBERG, J. AND MCEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
Concurring and Dissenting Statement by: McEWEN, P.J.E.
This is an appeal from judgment of sentence entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Lawrence County after a jury convicted David Page of two counts of aggravated indecent assault, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3125(a)(7) and (b), one count of indecent assault, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3126(a)(7), and one count of corruption of minors, 18 Pa.C.S.A. 6301(a). Appellant was sentenced to a term of incarceration of five to ten years. Appellant contends that the trial court erred when it failed to suppress a statement made by Appellant, when it permitted evidence of prior bad acts, when it allowed the Commonwealth to amend the information after close of the evidence and prior to closing arguments, and when it allowed the Commonwealth to discuss prior bad acts of Appellant during its closing argument. We affirm.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. EUGENE CLINTON JACKSON

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. EUGENE CLINTON JACKSON No. 2001 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 17 Atlantic: 965 A.2d 280 Filed: 1/30/2009
	Appeal from the PCRA Order entered November 15, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County Criminal No. CP-22-CR-0001248-2002
Before: LALLY-GREEN, FREEDBERG, and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, Eugene Clinton Jackson, appeals pro se from the order of the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, denying his second petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA). Appellant has also filed a petition to supplement his brief. We hold that the PCRA court erred when it dismissed appointed counsel sua sponte after the evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, we deny Appellant’s petition as moot, but remand for appointment of counsel.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WENDY COLLEEN KNELLER

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. WENDY COLLEEN KNELLER No. 1016 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 18 Atlantic: 971 A.2d 495 Filed: 1/30/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of October 23, 2006 in the Court of Common Pleas of Carbon County, Criminal, No. CP-13-CR-0000267-2006
Before: STEVENS, MUSMANNO, KLEIN, BENDER, BOWES, GANTMAN, SHOGAN, FREEDBERG and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Concurring Opinion by: CLELAND, J.
Dissenting Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Wendy Colleen Kneller appeals from a conviction for criminal conspiracy to commit cruelty to animals, in violation of Title 3, Section 325 of the Dog Law, for providing a gun and asking co-owner, Randy Miller, to kill their dog after it bit Kneller’s child. We note that the statutory language of section 325, et seq., titled “Destruction of Injured, Etc., Animals,” is not merely unclear on its face but, upon further analysis, can only be characterized as confusing. Moreover, since these various sections of the Dog Law, when read together in a reasonable manner, permit a dog owner to destroy a dog by use of a firearm, we find that the entire Dog Law is ambiguous, and under the rule of lenity, no criminal conviction under that section can stand if an owner shoots his or her dog or cat. Therefore, we reverse Kneller’s conviction.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. TIMOTHY HOPFER

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. TIMOTHY HOPFER No. 3427 EDA 2007 2009 PA Super 16 Atlantic: 965 A.2d 270 Filed: 1/28/2009
	Appeal from the PCRA Order entered November 8, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County Criminal No. CP-15-CR-0001417-2006
Before: ORIE MELVIN, KLEIN, and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: FITZGERALD, J.
Appellant, Timothy Hopfer, files this pro se appeal from the order of the Chester County Court of Common Pleas, dismissing as untimely his first petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA). The PCRA court found all of his claims waived because his Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) statement was untimely filed. Appellant has also filed a motion to amend and supplement statement of matters complained of on appeal. We hold that when an appellant timely files for an enlargement or extension of time within which to file his Rule 1925(b) statement, the trial court must explain why it finds that good cause was not shown before it may deny the request. We further hold that this Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Bond, 630 A.2d 1281 (Pa. Super. 1993), does not apply when the PCRA court grants counsel’s request to withdraw representation and dismisses the PCRA petition less than twenty days before the petitioner receives counsel’s official request for withdrawal. Accordingly, we vacate the PCRA court’s order and deny as moot Appellant’s motion to amend and supplement statement.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MARK WILLIAM MILLER

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MARK WILLIAM MILLER No. 835 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 14 Atlantic: 965 A.2d 276 Filed: 1/28/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence November 26, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County Criminal at No(s): CP-45-CR-0001168-2005
Before: STEVENS, KLEIN, and CLELAND, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
Concurring Statement by: KLEIN, J.
This is an appeal from the judgment of sentence entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County on November 26, 2007, following Appellant’s plea of guilty to the charge of murder of the third degree. Herein, Appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion when, in imposing sentence, it considered a charge that was nolle prossed as part of the plea agreement. We affirm the judgment of sentence.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA (Appellate at 1185) v. FELIPO MALDONADO COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA (Appellant at 1186) v. REINALDO ORT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA (Appellate at 1185) v. FELIPO MALDONADO COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA (Appellant at 1186) v. REINALDO ORTIZ-SANTANA No. 1185 & 1186 MDA 2007 2009 PA Super 15 Atlantic: 966 A.2d 1144 Petition for Reargument Denied 4/2/2009 Filed: 1/27/2009
	Appeal from Order dated June 25, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Criminal at No(s): CP-06-CR-0000205-2007 and CP-06-CR-0005278-2006
Before: STEVENS, LALLY-GREEN, and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
This is a consolidated appeal from the order entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County granting Appellees’ respective petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus and dismissing the charge of Escape, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5121(a) that had been filed against each parolee for leaving a detainment facility without permission. The Commonwealth argues the trial court erred in concluding section 5121 necessarily excludes from its reach parole violators who have been arrested and placed in a facility pending their parole violation hearing. As we agree with the Commonwealth, we vacate and remand.

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

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. PARRIS PRIDGEN

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. PARRIS PRIDGEN No. 278 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 12 Atlantic: 965 A.2d 1208 Filed: 1/26/2009
	Appeal from the Order Entered January 7, 2008, In the Court of Common Pleas Of Cambria County, Criminal at No. CP-11-CR-0000027-2007
Before: BOWES, FREEDBERG and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: FREEDBERG, J.
The Commonwealth appeals from the order entered on January 7, 2008, by the Honorable Timothy P. Creany, Court of Common Pleas of Cambria County, which granted in part and denied in part the motion to suppress evidence filed by Appellee Parris Pridgen. After review, we affirm.

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

Superior Court - JAMES BAYNE and ROSE BAYNE v. ASHLEE SMITH

JAMES BAYNE and ROSE BAYNE v. ASHLEE SMITH No. 1755 WDA 2007 2009 PA Super 11 Atlantic: 965 A.2d 265 Filed: 1/26/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment entered August 29, 2007 in the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County, Civil Division, at No. 2006-9338.
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., ORIE MELVIN, and SHOGAN, JJ.
Opinion by: ORIE MELVIN, J.
Appellants, James and Rose Bayne (Landlord), appeal from the trial court’s refusal to include attorney’s fees as part of the judgment entered against Appellee, Ashlee Smith (Tenant), in this Landlord/Tenant dispute. After review, we find the trial court erred in refusing to permit recovery of attorney’s fees and remand for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

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

Superior Court - WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS OF ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2004-MCWI v. JUDY

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS OF ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2004-MCWI v. JUDY MONROE AND JOSEPH MONROE No. 464 WDA 2008 2009 PA Super 13 Atlantic: 966 A.2d 1140 Filed: 1/26/2009
	Appeal from the Judgment February 6, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County Civil Division at No. 3376 of 2007
Before: BENDER, GANTMAN and POPOVICH, JJ.
Opinion by: BENDER, J.
Judy and Joseph Monroe appeal from the judgment entered on February 6, 2008, which resulted from the February 1, 2008 court order granting the motion for summary judgment in mortgage foreclosure filed by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. The February 1, 2008 order also denied the Monroes’ cross motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

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