Commonwealth v. Bell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Roberts,
We are here called upon to determine whether Section 2 of the act providing for the mandatory disposition of detainers lodged against persons imprisoned in any state, county or municipal penal or correctional institution, 1 commonly known as the “180 day rule”, is self-executing. Section 2 2 provides that if the “action” is not brought to trial within the 180 days required by Section l, 3 - the indictment shall be dismissed. We hold that Section 2 operates automatically. The statutory language clearly mandates that after the expiration of the 180-day period, “. .…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Commonwealth v. BakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Commonwealth v. GatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Commonwealth v. BellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Banks v. HornCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
- Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth v. MartinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Commonwealth v. VolkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Commonwealth v. RussellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.