Case ID: a2d_690/html/0231-03.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, Petitioner, v. Ronald SHOLCOSKY, Respondent.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    March 19, 1997.
    William P. O’Malley, for Petitioner.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 19th day of March, 1997, we Grant the Petition for Allowance of Appeal. This Court will consider the following issues on appeal:

1. Whether the Dr. Bindie’s statement in his written report concerning the time the fatal injury occurred constitutes a prior inconsistent statement pursuant to Commonwealth v. Brady, 510 Pa. 123, 507 A2d 66 (1986), and its progeny.

2. Whether a prior inconsistent statement of a non-party witness may be used as substantive evidence if the proponent of the prior statement does not question the witness in court concerning the statement.

3. Whether a prior inconsistent statement in an expert -witness’s written report maybe argued as substantive evidence if the proponent of the expert’s statement does not question the witness in court concerning the statement.