Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Jones

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 3, 1978No. 1073PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CERCONE, Judge:

The instant appeal arises from the revocation of appellant’s parole following a hearing thereon. Appellant admits that the parole revocation procedure satisfied minimal due process requirements as delineated in Morrisey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 92 S.Ct. 2593, 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972). See Moody v. Daggett, 429 U.S. 78, 97 S.Ct. 274, 50 L.Ed.2d 236 (1976). Instead, appellant contends that his parole revocation hearing was not held speedily enough after his convictions for the offenses which were the basis for revoking parole to satisfy the requirements of Pa.R.Crim.P., Rule 1409.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Moody v. DaggettSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Commonwealth v. KatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  4. Commonwealth v. WhiteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  5. Commonwealth v. HolmesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DickensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Commonwealth v. GalassiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  3. Commonwealth v. JohnsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API