Court Opinion

ID: 9630465
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 10:11:31.953098+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:03.941511
License: Public Domain

MANDERINO, Justice
(dissenting).
I dissent because there was no probable cause for the issuance of the warrant. The majority holds that probable cause existed because police surveillance corroborated the informant’s statements. In doing so, the majority ignores Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), which rejected the same argument now used by the majority. See also Commonwealth v. Norwood, 456 Pa. 330, 319 A.2d 908 (1974) (dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Manderino joined by Mr. Justice Roberts).