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?