Case Name: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Angel SANTIAGO, Petitioner
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2018-01-22
Citations: 179 A.3d 455
Docket Number: No. 318 EAL 2017
Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent
v.
Angel SANTIAGO, Petitioner
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 179
Pages: 455–455

Head Matter:
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent
v.
Angel SANTIAGO, Petitioner
No. 318 EAL 2017
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
January 22, 2018
ORDER.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 22nd day of January, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED to the following issue, as stated by Petitioner:
Is not the Superior Court's published opinion applying the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine to in-court identification testimony inconsistent with controlling Fourth Amendment United States Supreme Court precedent and Article I, § 8, and does not its reliance on overly broad language in Commonwealth v. Garvin, 448 Pa. 258, 293 A.2d 33 (1972), necessitate this Court's guidance and explicit rejection of Garvin and its progeny?
The Petition is otherwise DENIED.