Commonwealth v. Snowden

2025 Pa. Super. 5 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · January 10, 2025 · No. 402 WDA 2023

Summary

This document is a concurring and dissenting opinion from the Pennsylvania Superior Court reviewing a trial court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence. Judge Kunselman argues that the Commonwealth failed to establish probable cause for Brandi Snowden's arrest based solely on her possession of syringes in a purse while standing in a high-crime area. The opinion analyzes statutory definitions of drug paraphernalia and evaluates whether the officer's observations met the constitutional threshold for a lawful arrest.

Court
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Writing for the Court
Kunseman, J.; Lazarus, P.J.; Bowes, J.; Olson, J.; Nichols, J.; Murray, J.; King, J.; Beck, J.; Lane, J.
Jurisdiction
Pennsylvania
Decision date
January 10, 2025
Docket number
402 WDA 2023
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered March 8, 2023
Precedential value
published
Parties
Commonwealth v. Snowden

Topics

probable causesearch and seizurecriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Officer Lawrence had probable cause to arrest Snowden based on the observed syringes and her behavior.
  2. Whether the video not admitted into evidence is within the scope of review in suppression cases.

Key quotations

Probable cause to arrest requires a “probability, and not a prima facie showing,” of criminal activity.

Factual background

Officer Lawrence observed Brandi Snowden standing on a street in a high‑drug‑use area. He saw several syringes in her purse, noted that she was nodding off, and observed her move the syringes aside after being asked for identification. Snowden offered no explanation for possessing the syringes and gave no indication of drug use.

Procedural history

The case was appealed from the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division (case No. CP-02-CR-0005182-2022).

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…