From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Com. v. Ryan

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
May 2, 1980
277 Pa. Super. 262 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1980)

Opinion

Argued September 12, 1978.

Filed May 2, 1980.

Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County, Criminal No. 375-77, Honeyman, J.

Frederick W. McBrien, III, Norristown, for appellant.

Robert A. Selig, Assistant District Attorney, Norristown, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before VAN der VOORT, MONTGOMERY and WATKINS, JJ.


This cause having been considered by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 489 Pa. 221, 414 A.2d 37 which remanded it to the Superior Court for a determination whether the Order of the Superior Court entered July 27, 1979, 268 Pa. Super. 259, 407 A.2d 1345 was intended to be a direction to the Court below to grant the Motion to Suppress or to conduct a new suppression hearing;

NOW, THEREFORE, the above entitled cause is remanded to the court below with directions that it conduct a new suppression hearing. If, after a new hearing, it determines that the evidence concerned should not be suppressed then the judgment of sentence shall stand affirmed. If, on the other hand, it determines that the evidence concerned or a part of it shall be suppressed, then the judgment of sentence shall be vacated and a new trial be granted.


Summaries of

Com. v. Ryan

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
May 2, 1980
277 Pa. Super. 262 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1980)
Case details for

Com. v. Ryan

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. William F. RYAN, Appellant

Court:Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: May 2, 1980

Citations

277 Pa. Super. 262 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1980)
419 A.2d 762

Citing Cases

Commonwealth v. Rudolph

Id. at 18. It points to Commonwealth v. Ryan, 419 A.2d 762 (Pa. Super. 1980), as support for its…

Commonwealth v. Williams

to the court below with directions that it conduct a new suppression hearing. If, after a new hearing, it…