Commonwealth v. Stewart
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OLSZEWSKI, Judge:
Appellant, the Commonwealth, appeals from the trial court’s order granting a new trial to appellee, Gregory Stewart. The Commonwealth claims that the trial court erred in finding that defense counsel was ineffective for: (1) failing to present a defense at trial based upon a psychiatric disorder which was triggered by Stewart’s drunken state at the time of the offense; and (2) failing to present evidence of Stewart’s good character. We agree with the Commonwealth’s contentions that trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance and, accordingly, we reverse the trial…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. PierceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Commonwealth v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Commonwealth v. HicksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Commonwealth v. ByronSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. DeMossSupreme Court of Kansas · 1989
- Com. v. Baral, S.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Com. v. Hines, T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015