Commonwealth v. Carey

In Commonwealth v. Carey, the defendant appealed from the judgment of sentence following his convictions of PWID and related offenses. The defendant argued that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress. He also insisted the court’s imposition of a 12-month period of re-entry supervision pursuant to 61 Pa.C.S. § 6137.2 was an unconstitutional ex post facto punishment. The Pennsylvania Superior Court vacated part of the sentence and ruled that the application of Section 6137.2 was unconstitutional as applied to the defendant because he had committed the underlying offenses before the statute’s effective date. The Court otherwise affirmed, holding that the information contained in the warrant was sufficient to provide probable cause. Furthermore, the officers did not violate the knock-and-announce rule.

Carey