Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Watts

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 28, 2011PublishedCited by 339 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice ORIE MELVIN.

We granted allowance of appeal to determine whether a judicial opinion qualifies as a previously unknown “fact” capable of triggering the timeliness exception codified at section 9545(b)(l)(ii) of the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546, which applies if “the facts upon which the claim is predicated were unknown to the petitioner and could not have been ascertained by the exercise of due diligence.” The Superior Court found that a serial PCRA petition was timely under section 9545(b)(l)(ii) because it had been filed less than sixty days…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. BennettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. Commonwealth v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Commonwealth v. PeterkinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  5. Commonwealth v. HackettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008

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

3Cited by339 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MillerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Commonwealth v. EdmistonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  3. Commonwealth v. BrandonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  4. Commonwealth v. CintoraSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  5. Commonwealth v. Robinson, A., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

334 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