Case ID: pa_466/html/0287-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. POMEROY, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

353 A.2d 31
    COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellant, v. Dallars WAY, Appellee.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    Argued April 8, 1975.
    Decided March 17, 1976.
    F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Dist. Atty., Steven H. Goldblatt, Asst. Dist. Atty., Chief, Appeals Div., Maxine J. Stotland, Philadelphia, for appellant.
    Ronald J. Brockington, Philadelphia, for appellee.
    Before EAGEN, O’BRIEN, ROBERTS, POMEROY, NIX and MANDERINO, JJ.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The order of the trial court suppressing appellee’s statements because of violations of Rule 130 of Pa.R. of Crim.P., is affirmed.

JONES, C. J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

POMEROY, J., filed a dissenting opinion in which EAGEN, J., joins.

DISSENTING OPINION

POMEROY, J.

For the reasons which are fully set forth in my dissenting opinion in Commonwealth v. Dutton, 453 Pa. 547, 551, 307 A.2d 238 (1973), I dissent from the Court’s affirmance of the lower court’s application of the exclusionary rule first announced in Commonwealth v. Futch, 447 Pa. 389, 290 A.2d 417 (1972), to police conduct which occurred prior to the Futch decision.