Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Markle

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 9, 1987No. 3251; 3249 and 3250PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MONTEMURO, Judge:

This case comes before us on a consolidation of three appeals. The Commonwealth appeals from the Order of the Post-Conviction Hearing Act 1 (“PCHA”) Court granting Joseph Markle (designated as appellee herein) the right to file a direct appeal nunc pro tunc. Appellee appeals nunc pro tunc from the trial court’s judgment of concurrent sentences following a jury trial where appellee was found guilty of burglary 2 and conspiracy. 3 He also appeals from the PCHA Court’s denial of his other grounds for PCHA relief. We affirm.

On June 25, 1981 a Philadelphia police officer,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. PettusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Commonwealth v. SullivanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Commonwealth v. WilsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  4. Commonwealth v. HolmesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  5. Commonwealth v. WebsterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Com. v. Prater, W.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2021
  3. Commonwealth v. DouglasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Commonwealth v. BakerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Commonwealth v. DouglasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

1 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