Commonwealth v. Libby (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-108-15)
Commonwealth may not file sexually dangerous person petition against someone in custody awaiting trial without incompetency finding.
Weekly
Schussel, et al. v. Commissioner of Revenue (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-107-15)
Double assessment upheld for taxpayers who knowingly filed false returns reporting income amounts identical to those found false in federal tax evasion prosecution.
Commonwealth v. Dossantos (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-106-15)
Statute requires judges to ensure adequate factual basis exists before recording domestic abuse allegations in statewide record system.
Commonwealth v. Komnenus (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-071-15)
Warrantless apartment entry unlawful but evidence admissible where defendant spontaneously disclosed cocaine without police exploitation of the illegality.
F.A.P. v. J.E.S. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-072-15)
Harassment prevention order challenged. Judge misapplied law by requiring proof of fear rather than proof of alleged sex crime. Remanded.
Commonwealth v. Wallace (and a companion case) (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-105-15)
Nine-year delay in prosecution for murder. Speedy trial violated for one defendant based on Commonwealth negligence in obtaining custody; not violated for other due to defendant's flight.
Commonwealth v. Martinez (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-070-15)
Motor vehicle accident defendant's offer to provide license and registration information insufficient; statute requires information actually made known to other party.
Commonwealth v. Thompson (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-069-15)
Boating OUI statute's implied consent provision permits blood testing without constitutional protection against refusal. Statutory consent standard applies, not constitutional standard.
Adoption of Odetta (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-068-15)
Postadoption visitation with non-parent relative properly ordered where specific factual findings support child's best interests, including religious and cultural heritage preservation.
Commonwealth v. Libby (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-104-15)
Reversed as to pre-arrest statements; affirmed as to post-arrest statements. Pre-arrest interview was noncustodial, so Miranda did not apply. Post-arrest statements properly suppressed because defendant lacked clear understanding of right to appointed counsel.