Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Kent

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 22, 2002PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKlein, J.

¶ 1 Raymond M. Kent appeals from the order denying his petition under the Post-Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546. We remand for appointment of counsel and grant Kent leave to file his direct appeal nunc pro tunc within thirty days of appointment of counsel.

¶ 2 Kent raises a number of issues on appeal, but we need only address one. Kent claims he was denied counsel on direct appeal and, as a result, he lost his direct appeal rights. A brief recitation of the facts is in order.

¶ 3 Evidence indicated Kent and his sister had some beers and smoked crack cocaine on the night of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Douglas v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Commonwealth v. PaysonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Commonwealth v. CiptakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. ShannonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Commonwealth v. RobinsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Com. v. Blank, G.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  2. Com. v. Johnston, C., Jr.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  3. Com. v. Jorge, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
  4. Com. v. Sanches, R.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  5. SANCHES v. CLARKDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API