Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Commonwealth v. Ellis

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 9, 1990No. 1755Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWieand, Judge

After reviewing the briefs filed pro se by appellant and by his counsel, I concur in the decision of the majority to affirm the judgment of sentence. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s formulation of a policy which precludes consideration by the Superior Court of pro se briefs where separate briefs have been filed by counsel. It is not that I disagree necessarily with the substance of such a policy as much as I disagree with this Court’s right to determine the same. My review of the Supreme Court’s per curiam order in Commonwealth v. Gaerttner, 518 Pa. 452, 543 A.2d 1091…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GaerttnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Commonwealth v. ShawSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API