Case ID: pa_603/html/0137-01.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

982 A.2d 1218
    COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. Ernest CANNON, Respondent.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    Oct. 20, 2009.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 20th day of October, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Did the Superior Court override controlling authority establishing that in a joint trial, where the Commonwealth properly redacted a co-defendant’s statement and did not use it to directly establish defendant’s guilt, and where the trial court properly instructed the jury regarding that statement, the narrow exception to the presumption that a jury will follow its instructions established in Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), does not apply?