Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Commonwealth v. Reidenbaugh

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 12, 1978No. 683Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPrice, Judge

I agree with the majority that this case should be remanded to the court below for a hearing under Commonwealth v. Twiggs, 460 Pa. 105, 331 A.2d 440 (1975). Although I concur with the majority’s disposition of this case, I must confess that I do so with some hesitancy. This hesitancy arises because the order of the supreme court is not clearly phrased and therefore invites various interpretations. Assuming, however, that the majority does correctly fathom the directive of the supreme court to mean that first appellate counsel was ineffective, then we may properly consider only the first issue…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. TwiggsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Commonwealth v. ReidenbaughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API