Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Gorham

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 19, 1985No. 3406PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPAETH, President Judge:

This is an appeal from judgment of sentence for burglary and related charges. Appellant argues that the trial court erred in (1) denying his Rule 1100 motion to dismiss, (2) admitting his inculpatory statements, and (3) admitting evidence obtained through a search of appellant. He also argues that trial counsel was ineffective. We find appellant’s arguments without merit and therefore affirm.

Rule 1100 requires that trial commence no later than 180 days from the date on which the complaint is filed, but excludable from this period, is “such period of delay at any stage…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. CohenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Commonwealth v. MillhouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Commonwealth v. MorganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. Commonwealth v. HendersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Commonwealth v. ColonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. BairdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  3. Commonwealth v. HollingsworthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Commonwealth v. WentzelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Commonwealth v. PurnellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986

5 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