Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Bolden

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 5, 1984No. 00028PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CIRILLO, Judge:

This is an appeal by the Commonwealth from an order dismissing rape, burglary, indecent assault, and simple assault charges against appellee, Eugene Bolden, on the basis of Pa.R.Crim.P. 1100. The case at bar presents the issue of the application of Rule 1100 to judicial delay. Initially, it must be noted that we are guided in our decision by the sentiments expressed by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Genovese, 493 Pa. 65, 69-70, 72-73, 425 A.2d 367, 369-70, 371 (1981):

Rule 1100 “serves two equally important functions: (1) the protection of the accused’s speedy…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SheltonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. Commonwealth v. MayfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Commonwealth v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Commonwealth v. GenoveseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Commonwealth v. CrowleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. StewartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Commonwealth v. HollingsworthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Commonwealth v. McCutcheonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Commonwealth v. BradfordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Commonwealth v. HawkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

2 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