Filter This View

  • V.C. v L.P.

    Publication Date: 2018-02-20
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0176

    Trial court erred in holding grandmother in contempt for failing to abide by its custody order because the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case, where the New York court that issued the original custody decree asserted exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the matter and trial court thus lacked the authority to find grandmother in contempt. Reversed.

  • Commonwealth v. Edwards

    Publication Date: 2018-02-13
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0133

    While the listing of the races and genders of prospective jurors on a peremptory strike sheet did not per se violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Batson v. Kentucky, defendant established a Batson violation by showing that the commonwealth struck at least one potential juror with discriminatory intent. The appellate court vacated defendants judgment of sentence and remanded.

  • Commonwealth v. Edwards

    Publication Date: 2018-01-30
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1916

    While the listing of the races and genders of prospective jurors on a peremptory strike sheet did not per se violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Batson v. Kentucky, defendant established a Batson violation by showing that the commonwealth struck at least one potential juror with discriminatory intent. The appellate court vacated defendants judgment of sentence and remanded.

  • Commonwealth v. Butler

    Publication Date: 2017-11-21
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1701

    In this case of first impression, the court ruled that §9799.24(e)(3) of the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act violated the federal and state constitutions because it increased the criminal penalty to which a defendant is exposed without the chosen fact-finder making the necessary factual findings beyond a reasonable doubt. The court vacated an order finding defendant to be a sexually violent predator and remanded for notice under 42 Pa.C.S. §9799.23.

  • Commonwealth v. Updike

    Publication Date: 2017-10-31
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1606

    The Commonwealths blood draw evidence collected prior to the U.S. Supreme Courts decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota was admissible under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule as defendant only sought suppression under the federal constitution. The court reversed the trial courts suppression order and remanded for further proceedings.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Delaware County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Commonwealth v. Carper

    Publication Date: 2017-10-31
    Practice Area: Constitutional Law | Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1607

    Defendant properly preserved his state constitutional claim that his blood draw evidence was inadmissible, and the appellate court concluded that such evidence was inadmissible given that no good-faith exception to the evidence exclusionary rule exists under the state constitution. The court affirmed an order granting defendants habeas corpus motion.

  • Commonwealth v. Horn

    Publication Date: 2017-10-24
    Practice Area: Attorney Rates and Arrangements | Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-1590

    The appellate court lacked jurisdiction over defendants appeal from an order denying his petition to remove himself from the accelerated rehabilitative disposition program because acceptance into and termination from the program involve interlocutory matters. The court quashed defendants appeal.