From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth v. Koch

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
May 15, 2012
44 A.3d 1147 (Pa. 2012)

Opinion

2012-05-15

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. AMY N. KOCH, Respondent.


Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court, No. 947 MAL 2011.

Prior report: Pa.Super., 39 A.3d 996.

ORDER


PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 15th day of May 2012, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner are:

(1) Did a panel of the Superior Court err in reversing the trial court's determination that drug-related text messages were not offered for their truth and thus admissible where it's [sic] ruling conflicts with a prior ruling of a panel of the Superior Court and creates uncertainty in the law?

(2) Did a panel of the Superior Court err in reversing the trial court's determination that drug-related text messages were properly authenticated where it misapprehended the plain language of Pa.R.E. 901 and rendered an opinion inconsistent with a prior opinion of a panel of the Superior Court, again creating uncertainty in the law?


Summaries of

Commonwealth v. Koch

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
May 15, 2012
44 A.3d 1147 (Pa. 2012)
Case details for

Commonwealth v. Koch

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. AMY N. KOCH, Respondent.

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Date published: May 15, 2012

Citations

44 A.3d 1147 (Pa. 2012)

Citing Cases

Commonwealth v. Koch

This Court granted the Commonwealth's petition for allowance of appeal, which challenged both of the…

State v. Otkovic

However, a number of other jurisdictions have held that text messages may be “authenticated by circumstantial…