Commonwealth Of Pa. v. Griffith

Decision Date14 September 2010
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. Michelle Necole GRIFFITH, Respondent.
CourtPennsylvania Supreme Court
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court, No. 739 MAL 2009.

Prior report: Pa.Super., 985 A.2d 230.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 14th day of September, 2010, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is

Whether expert testimony is required to prove that the amount of a controlled substance found in a defendant's blood or urine caused the driving impairment charged under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(d).

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Commonwealth v. Griffith
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • 2 Noviembre 2011
    ...substance found in a defendant's blood or urine caused the driving impairment under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(d)[ (2) ].Commonwealth v. Griffith, 607 Pa. 100, 4 A.3d 608 (2010). This issue sets forth a legal question, to wit, whether the evidence to establish a violation of subsection 3802(d)(2) ca......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT