The threshold requirement to disclosure of a CI's identity, pursuant to Pa. R. Crim. P. 573(B)(2), is that the defense make some showing that the information sought is "material" to the preparation of the defense and that the request is reasonable.

A system of mandatory public education creates an entitlement that may not be abridged in an arbitrary fashion. Even a temporary suspension less than ten days in length requires at least notice to the student of the charges and a hearing where the student has the opportunity to be heard. However, this hearing may be held immediately after the alleged misconduct, and in cases where a student's presence poses "a continuing danger . . . or an ongoing threat of disrupting the academic process" the student may be removed from school immediately.

Local school officials have broad discretion in meeting the requirement of 22 Pa. Code § 12.6(h) that a school district provide "some provision" for the education of an expelled child. A combination of "assigned home study and weekly in-school counseling" satisfies this requirement.

At a suspension hearing, the school board need only find that a student committed the act resulting in expulsion by a preponderance of the evidence. This standard can be satisfied even by the presentation of circumstantial evidence, without more.

Because the Commonwealth has a compelling state interest in limiting the fundamental right of liberty from restraint, and because the Involuntary Civil Commitment statute does not create a suspect class, it does not offend the equal protection clause. Moreover, the Act, because of its "non-punitive purpose" and "non-punitive effect" it is not penal, and involuntary civil commitment under the Act does not require the constitutional protection of a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Local public housing authorities have "the discretion to terminate the lease of a tenant when a member of the household or a guest engages in drug-related activity, regardless of whether the tenant knew, or should have known, of the drug-related activity.

A criminal defendant is entitled to a jury charge that "evidence of good character or reputation may, in and of itself, create a reasonable doubt of guilt and, thus, require a verdict of not guilty." An instruction that "evidence of good character is material and essential testimony in determining the innocence of the defendant" is inadequate.

A defendant needs to be informed of all the direct consequences of a guilty plea. A guilty plea is not involuntary if a defendant is unaware of a collateral consequence of a plea; however, if he or she is actively misinformed about the collateral consequences by his or her attorney, then the defendant has not received the effective assistance of counsel and his or her plea may be withdrawn.

While the Commonwealth may prove its case wholly by circumstantial evidence, it may not do so by mere suspicion or conjecture. Evidence of mere presence in yard behind a building is insufficient to prove burglary. That a defendant and others are seen walking in an enclosed yard behind a burglarized building, then later are seen walking out of the yard does not prove that they burglarized the building. More is required for a conviction than mere presence in the area of a burglary.

Trial courts considering whether to grant a continuance so that a defendant can proceed with retained counsel of his or her choice must engage in a balancing of defendant's right to counsel of his or her choice against the Commonwealth's interest in the swift administration of justice. A trial court abuses its discretion when it denies a defendant's requests for a continuance without conducting such an inquiry