Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Williams

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 19, 2014Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION

Justice TODD.

While I agree with much of the Majority Opinion, I cannot join the majority’s determination that good cause did not exist for discovery under the circumstances in this matter because the majority does not analyze whether our Court has jurisdiction over the good cause issue under the collateral order doctrine. Further, in this capital appeal, in which Appellee’s conviction was based largely upon the testimony of his co-conspirators, the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”) court failed to set forth any meaningful analysis of the good cause standard for discovery,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Commonwealth v. WallsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. Commonwealth v. EdmistonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  5. Melvin v. DoeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API