Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Terfinko

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 13, 1984No. 77 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1982Published

1DissentNix, Chief Justice

A fair reading of the record requires the conclusion reached by the Superior Court that “the Commonwealth failed to establish that it was entitled to an extension because of judicial delay.” Commonwealth v. Terfinko, 298 Pa.Super. 640, 445 A.2d 202 (1982). (Unpublished Memorandum Opinion). The Commonwealth failed to show that the delay was unavoidable. See Commonwealth v. Romberger, 490 Pa. 258, 416 A.2d 458 (1980); Commonwealth v. Morgan, 484 Pa. 117, 398 A.2d 972 (1979); Commonwealth v. Mayfield, 469 Pa. 214, 364 A.2d 1345 (1976). The record does not contain the requisite certification that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MayfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. Commonwealth v. MitchellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Commonwealth v. EhredtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. Commonwealth v. MorganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Commonwealth v. PolskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

2 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