Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Jackson

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 21, 2000PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FORD ELLIOTT, J.:

¶ 1 This is an appeal following remand so that the trial court could hold a hearing to determine whether the Commonwealth acted with due diligence, as required by Pa.R.Crim.P. 1100(g). The trial court concluded that the Commonwealth did, in fact, act with due diligence and therefore denied appellant’s motion to dismiss. We affirm, albeit based on an analysis different from that articulated by the trial court. See Commonwealth v. Harper, 416 Pa.Super. 608, 611 A.2d 1211, 1213 n. 1 (1992) (this court “may affirm the decision of the trial court if there is any basis on the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SpenceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Commonwealth v. HillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Commonwealth v. MatisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  4. Commonwealth v. CookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Commonwealth v. PolskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HuntSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. Commonwealth v. RamosSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. Commonwealth v. KearseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Commonwealth v. AaronSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Commonwealth v. BrownSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

29 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