Commonwealth v. Gaither

The majority says that appellant’s privately retained trial counsel was not ineffective when he failed to appear to argue the post-trial motions he filed on appellant’s behalf.1 It reasons that because no meritorious issues *59were raised in those motions, the failure to argue them or to file a brief as directed by the lower court could not be termed ineffectiveness.2 I cannot agree with this analysis.

Even if we assume that the issues raised were without merit,3 it still does not follow that conscientious advocacy would not have affected the trial judge’s decision, at least as to sentence.…