Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Liston

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 6, 2008No. 1159 Western District Appeal 2006PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.:

¶ 1 We determined this case should be considered by the court sitting en banc, to decide what procedure the trial court should follow when faced with a PCRA 1 petition requesting restoration of the petitioner’s appellate rights nunc pro tunc, and also making “other” claims of trial counsel ineffectiveness. We hold that where, as in the case sub judice, the court, on collateral review, grants the petitioner the right to appeal nunc pro tunc, it shall additionally grant the filing of post-sentence motions nunc pro tunc. This will enable the court to establish a…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GrantSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Commonwealth v. HubbardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Commonwealth v. BomarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Commonwealth v. DancerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Commonwealth v. SullivanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. HolmesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Commonwealth v. ListonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  3. Commonwealth v. FransenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  4. Commonwealth v. BarnettSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  5. Commonwealth v. MooreSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009

20 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