From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth v. Montgomery

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Mar 12, 2019
204 A.3d 360 (Pa. 2019)

Summary

granting review of the issue of whether the Superior Court erred in holding that a handgun that was only partially tucked into a waistband, with the handle visible, was "concealed" for purposes of the Uniform Firearms Act

Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Montgomery

Opinion

No. 481 EAL 2018

03-12-2019

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Darren MONTGOMERY, Petitioner


ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 12th day of March, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

(1) Did not the Superior Court err, in a published opinion, in holding that a handgun that was only partially tucked into a waistband, with the handle being visible to all, was nonetheless "concealed" for the purposes of the Uniform Firearms Act?


Summaries of

Commonwealth v. Montgomery

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Mar 12, 2019
204 A.3d 360 (Pa. 2019)

granting review of the issue of whether the Superior Court erred in holding that a handgun that was only partially tucked into a waistband, with the handle visible, was "concealed" for purposes of the Uniform Firearms Act

Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Montgomery
Case details for

Commonwealth v. Montgomery

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent v. DARREN MONTGOMERY, Petitioner

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT

Date published: Mar 12, 2019

Citations

204 A.3d 360 (Pa. 2019)

Citing Cases

Commonwealth v. Montgomery

The narrow question posed by Appellant in this appeal involves only the concealment element of the crime. See…