Commonwealth v. Stein

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Appellant’s counsel in the Superior Court filed a brief which consisted of a xeroxed copy of a ten page “brief” prepared by appellant himself. Counsel attached to this a memorandum requesting the Superior Court to “peruse and consider said document with the same attention as if it were prepared by counsel learned in the law.” Counsel also added a short “further argument” based on appellant’s original uncounseled POTT A petition. The argument does little more than refer the court to several pages of appellant’s hand-drawn brief and hand-drawn PCHA petition.

This is hardly the…