Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Ciptak

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 11, 1995PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

2Per curiam

The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. Petitioner asserts that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the trial court’s imposition of the costs of prosecution without first determining petitioner’s ability to pay pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 1407(c). In the instant matter, trial counsel and appellate counsel are both members of the same public defender’s office. As a general rule, a public defender may not argue the ineffectiveness of another member of the same public defender’s office since appellate counsel, in essence, is deemed to have asserted a claim of his or…

3Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. McBeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. ShannonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

4Cited by31 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  2. Commonwealth v. JetteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  3. Commonwealth v. BondSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. Commonwealth v. WatsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  5. Commonwealth v. GreenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998

26 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