Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Crowley

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 23, 1981No. 67PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERTS, Justice:

Appellant Joseph Crowley contends on this appeal that his Rule 1100 rights have been violated, and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to protect those rights. We agree, and accordingly reverse appellant’s conviction.

A criminal complaint charging appellant with possessing implements for escape was filed on July 21, 1976. On January 7, 1977 the Commonwealth petitioned for an extension of time for commencement of trial pursuant to Rule 1100, claiming that no courtrooms were available before January 17, 1977, the 180th day. A hearing to consider this Commonwealth…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Washington v. MaroneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  2. Commonwealth v. MayfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Commonwealth v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Commonwealth v. EhredtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Commonwealth v. CrowleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. CrowleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Commonwealth v. LambSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Pierce v. Philadelphia Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Commonwealth v. BythewaySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Commonwealth v. RyanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

9 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