Case ID: a3d_134/html/0051-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Darrin Orlando MATHIS, Petitioner.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    March 30, 2016.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 30th day of March, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Whether, as a matter of first impression, the Superior Court erred in affirming the trial court’s decision denying [petitioner's] motion to suppress evidence where state parole agents lacked authority and subsequently reasonable suspicion to detain [petitioner] and conduct an investigative detention in violation of Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution?

The parties are directed to separately address in their briefs the subsumed and alternate claims respecting (1) the authority of parole agents, and (2) whether reasonable suspicion existed to support a seizure and a subsequent weapons frisk.