Court Opinion

ID: 9756738
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 21:50:35.209279+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:28.413890
License: Public Domain

Justice SAYLOR,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent, as I believe that the facts of this case are materially distinguishable from those before the Court in Commonwealth v. Nolan, 579 Pa. 300, 855 A.2d 834, 839 (2004); Nolan’s footnote 7 is dictum in any event, since that case concerned the application of a prior version of Section 110; and the trial court opinion in this case, adopted by the Superior Court, contains an extensive discussion of the “occur[rence] within the same judicial district” term of Section 110. At this juncture, I offer no comment on the merits; I merely believe that the majority’s present order is likely to cause confusion, in light of the above considerations.