Summary
holding supervisee does not have diminished expectation of privacy, absent clear policy or agreement between supervisee and government body entrusted with supervision
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. ChambersOpinion
1996
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Petitions for Allowance of Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jan 1, 1996
544 Pa. 605 (Pa. 1996)
Summaries of
Petitions for Allowance of Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jan 1, 1996
544 Pa. 605 (Pa. 1996)
holding supervisee does not have diminished expectation of privacy, absent clear policy or agreement between supervisee and government body entrusted with supervision
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Chambersrecognizing that Pennsylvania Constitution affords its citizens a greater right to privacy than the Federal Constitution
Summary of this case from Com. v. Lechnerregarding claim of excessiveness of sentence as a challenge to the discretionary aspects of sentence
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Brownregarding claim of excessiveness of sentence as a challenge to discretionary aspects of sentence
Summary of this case from Com. v. MartinCase details for
Petitions for Allowance of Appeal
Case Details
Full title:PETITIONS FOR ALLOWANCE OF APPEAL
Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date published: Jan 1, 1996
Citations
544 Pa. 605 (Pa. 1996)
Citing Cases
Com. v. Martin
42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9781(b); Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 513 Pa. 508, 522 A.2d 17 (1987); Commonwealth v.…
State v. Pena-FloresMoreover, as explained earlier, I do not believe the regime adopted by the majority expands the privacy and…