From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth v. Castro

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Nov 22, 2016
161 A.3d 798 (Pa. 2016)

Opinion

No. 310 EAL 2016

11-22-2016

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Wendy CASTRO, Petitioner


ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 22nd day of November, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, rephrased for clarity, are:

(1) In view of Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980), and Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981), did the Superior Court err in concluding that an arrest warrant for Earnest Moreno authorized entry into the residence of Angel Romero and Wendy Castro for the purpose of executing the arrest warrant?
(2) Did the Superior Court apply an erroneous standard of review regarding the suppression court's finding of fact that the authorities did not have express permission to enter the residence of Angel Romero and Wendy Castro?


Summaries of

Commonwealth v. Castro

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Nov 22, 2016
161 A.3d 798 (Pa. 2016)
Case details for

Commonwealth v. Castro

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent v. WENDY CASTRO, Petitioner

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT

Date published: Nov 22, 2016

Citations

161 A.3d 798 (Pa. 2016)

Citing Cases

Commonwealth v. Chisholm

Relying on the latter principle, this Court has held that when the police have a reasonable, but mistaken,…