From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bergdoll v. Com

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District
May 16, 2005
583 Pa. 44 (Pa. 2005)

Summary

examining the following ballot question, “Shall the Pennsylvania Constitution be amended to provide that a person accused of a crime has the right to be ‘confronted with the witnesses against him,’ instead of the right to ‘meet the witnesses face to face’?”

Summary of this case from Sprague v. Cortes

Opinion

May 16, 2005.

Appeal No. 175 MAP 2004 from the Order of the Commonwealth Court entered September 16, 2004 at No. 7060 MD 2003 sustaining preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer.


ORDER


AND NOW, this 16th day of May, 2005, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Bergdoll v. Com

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District
May 16, 2005
583 Pa. 44 (Pa. 2005)

examining the following ballot question, “Shall the Pennsylvania Constitution be amended to provide that a person accused of a crime has the right to be ‘confronted with the witnesses against him,’ instead of the right to ‘meet the witnesses face to face’?”

Summary of this case from Sprague v. Cortes
Case details for

Bergdoll v. Com

Case Details

Full title:John G. BERGDOLL, Gerald C. Grimaud, Matthew R. Battersby, Appellants v…

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District

Date published: May 16, 2005

Citations

583 Pa. 44 (Pa. 2005)
874 A.2d 1148

Citing Cases

Sprague v. Cortes

In fact, ballot questions have been presented to voters in this Commonwealth in various forms, some of which…

Costa v. Cortes

Also, our Supreme Court has made clear that the analytical model for deciding a challenge to the enactment of…