over the marriage. Pennsylvania courts may issue a decree of divorce “if, at the time the action was filed, [at least one party] had been a ‘bona fide resident’ of [the] Commonwealth for a period of at least one year.... ‘Bona fide residence’ means domicile; i.e., actual residence coupled with the intention to remain there permanently or indefinitely.” Zinn v. Zinn, 327 Pa.Super. 128, 475 A.2d 132, 133 (1984) (internal citations omitted). The petitioner’s mother, a lawful permanent resident of the United States residing in Philadelphia, was clearly a bona fide resident of Pennsylvania. A party to a Pennsylvania divorce proceeding need not be a citizen of the United States, nor is it necessary for the marriage to have occurred in the United States. Sinha v. Sinha, 834 A.2d 600 (2003) (<HOLDING>). At the time the petitioner’s mother came to
holding that the arrest of an indian on indian land was illegal because the state had no jurisdiction over the reservation to enforce its laws  including the execution of a search warrant  unless congress consented to the states jurisdiction holding that pennsylvania courts had jurisdiction over the dissolution of a marriage that occurred in india between two indian citizens holding that a nevada state court had no jurisdiction to entertain a civil action filed by a nonindian against an indian for events that occurred on indian land holding that state has no jurisdiction over civil suit by nonindian against indian where cause of action arises on indian reservation holding that oklahoma police officer was without jurisdiction to arrest indian inside indian reservation when the state has neither received by express grant nor acted pursuant to congressional authorization to assume criminal jurisdiction over indian country