Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Rinier

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 28, 1978No. 1982PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

Appellant contends that the record does not demonstrate that he voluntarily and knowingly withdrew his post-verdict motions. As a remedy, appellant requests that we permit him to file post-verdict motions nunc pro tunc. Instead, we remand for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether appellant voluntarily and knowingly withdrew his post-verdict motions.

*169On July 21, 1976, a Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas jury adjudged appellant guilty of rape1 and theft by unlawful taking.2 After the jury returned its guilty verdicts, the lower court advised appellant that “you have the…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BlairSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Commonwealth v. PerilloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Commonwealth v. PughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Commonwealth v. KinseySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Commonwealth v. CatheySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. JohnsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Commonwealth v. BellacchioSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  3. Commonwealth v. TaylorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Commonwealth v. BrazzleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Commonwealth v. BradleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

6 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