Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Stancell

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 16, 1969No. Petition for leave to appeal, 961PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Roberts,

Petitioner’s PCHA petition was denied after hearing, and he appealed to the Superior Court which affirmed per curiam. A petition for allocatur followed.

The entire petition reads as follows: “1. On November 1, 1968, . . . the Superior Court of Pennsylvania filed a Per Curiam Order affirming the action of the Lower Court.

“2. The Superior Court failed to consider all the facts presented on behalf of the petitioner, in rendering its decision. The Superior Court failed to properly apply the law to the facts that were established.
“Notice of this petition has been…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ellis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  2. Commonwealth v. HickoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  3. Commonwealth v. VillanoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DanielsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. Commonwealth v. SteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  3. Commonwealth v. HaywoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  4. Commonwealth v. TrowerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  5. Commonwealth v. SteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969

3 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