Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Turiano

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 13, 1992No. 00353PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAVANAUGH, Judge:

Appellant asserts that the trial court erred by denying his request to withdraw his guilty plea because of (1) ineffectiveness of counsel in preparing an insanity defense and (2) alleged interference with his legal mail by prison guards. We are constrained to agree with the tenor of his first argument based on the liberal standard for the withdrawal of guilty pleas before sentencing first articulated in Commonwealth v. Forbes, 450 Pa. 185, 299 A.2d 268 (1973). We do so with reluctance, however, because we feel the standard adopted in Forbes no longer comports with guilty plea…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation v. Secretary of LaborSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Commonwealth v. ForbesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Commonwealth v. DurstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. Commonwealth v. ShafferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. Commonwealth v. WillisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. RandolphSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Commonwealth v. FloodSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. Commonwealth v. IseleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. Commonwealth v. ShekerkoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Commonwealth v. MillerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

8 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