Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Baird

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 22, 2009No. 23 WAP 2007PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice SAYLOR.

We allowed appeal to consider whether, for the purpose of assessing the government’s compliance with the prompt-trial requirement of Rule of Criminal Procedure 600, notice to an attorney of a judicial proceeding serves as sufficient notice to the defendant-client.

In February 2003, Appellant Scott D. Baird was arrested and charged by written complaint with burglary, robbery, and resisting arrest. He was released that same day after posting-bond, and he executed documents reflecting his agreement to be present for all legal proceedings. Two weeks later, Appellant’s counsel…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Commonwealth v. GrantSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. United States v. MacDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ArmstrongSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Commonwealth v. Barbour, D., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  3. Weis v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2010
  4. Commonwealth v. TickelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  5. Commonwealth v. WrightSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018

25 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