Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Strong

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 29, 2000PublishedCited by 100 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CAPPY, Justice.

This is a direct appeal from the order of the trial court denying appellant’s petition pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (Hereinafter “the PCRA”). 42 Pa.C.S. § 9546(d). (Suspended August 11, 1997, reinstating subsection (d) from the 1988 Act). Appellant alleges that he is entitled to relief under the PCRA, as his conviction resulted from a constitu*459tional violation of due process in contravention of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). 42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(2)(i). As for the following reasons we find appellant is entitled to relief,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Napue v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1959

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

3Cited by100 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  2. Commonwealth v. PittsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  3. Commonwealth v. WashingtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  4. Commonwealth v. Treiber, S., ApltSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  5. Commonwealth v. KoehlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012

95 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