Commonwealth v. Gandy
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
BENDER, J.
Appellant, Jamil Gandy, appeals pro se from the order entered on August 22, 2011, denying his petition for relief filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S. § 9541-9546. Appellant contends that his otherwise untimely PCRA petition met the timeliness exception contained in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9545(b)(iii), claiming that our Supreme Court’s recent decision in Commonwealth v. Wright, 609 Pa. 22, 14 A.3d 798 (2011), created a new constitutional right held to apply retroactively. Because we hold that Wright does not create a new constitutional right, we affirm.
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Commonwealth v. CarrSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Commonwealth v. RaganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Commonwealth v. Abdul-SalaamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Commonwealth v. PerrinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Commonwealth v. HutchinsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TaylorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Commonwealth v. CallahanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Commonwealth v. ConcordiaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Commonwealth v. WalshSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Com. v. Adams, L.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.