Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Moore

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 15, 2009No. 1442 WDA 2008&1448 WDA 2008PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

ALLEN, J.:

¶ 1 Garrick Moore (“Appellant”) appeals from the trial court order denying his petition for extension of time to file a post-sentence motion. We remand with instructions, and hold that, for reasons of judicial economy and fairness, a defendant who raises ineffective assistance of counsel claims after being found in contempt of a Protection from Abuse order (“PFA”) and sentenced to imprisonment pursuant to 23 Pa.C.SA. § 6114, is entitled to an eviden-tiary hearing on the ineffectiveness of counsel claims, such that the record is *990adequate to assess the claims on direct…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GrantSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Commonwealth v. BomarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Commonwealth v. DrevesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Commonwealth v. BrumbaughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Commonwealth v. BarnesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Carrillo-DiazSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Commonwealth v. ListonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  3. Com. v. Baldwin, T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  4. Com. v. Baldwin, T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  5. Com. v. Bower, M., Jr.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018

15 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