Smith v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentFriedman, Judge
Because I believe that Ronald Smith’s (Parolee) cash slip here is sufficient to evince the date of mailing of his petition for review, I must dissent.
As the majority points out, our rules of appellate procedure specifically provide that a petition for review shall be deemed filed on the date the petition is deposited in the mail, “as shown on a U.S. Postal Service Form 3817 certificate of mailing.” Pa.R.A.P. 1514(a). However, in Sheets v. Department of Public Welfare, 84 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 388, 479 A2d 80 (1984), we indicated that although Pa.R.A.P. 1514(a) specifically refers to the use of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- McCaskill v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & ParoleCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- United States v. Delbert W. Wadsworth and Kurt W. WadsworthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Miller v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Commonwealth v. ZanineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.