Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Graves

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 2, 1976No. Appeal, 375PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

per Curiam,

Appellant contends that his trial attorney’s stipulation to the selection of two jurors in his absence constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.

Appellant’s present attorney did not represent him at trial. Thus, his ineffectiveness claim can be raised on direct appeal if the grounds upon which the claim is based appear in the trial record. Commonwealth v. Dancer, 460 Pa. 95, 331 A. 2d 435 (1975). The facts constituting the alleged ineffectiveness are set forth in an affidavit submitted by the attorney who represented appellant-Norman at trial:

“On the day that trial was…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Washington v. MaroneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  2. Hopt v. People of Territory of UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  3. Lewis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  4. Commonwealth v. DancerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Commonwealth v. FeltonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1973

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Noble v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  2. Commonwealth v. McLaurinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Commonwealth v. BurchSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Commonwealth v. DolenoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  5. Commonwealth v. HowardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

6 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