Legal Opinion

Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Burton, S.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 28, 2017No. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Burton, S. - No. 9 WAP 2016PublishedCited by 345 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JUSTICE TODD

In this discretionary appeal by the Commonwealth, we consider whether the presumption that information of public record cannot be considered “unknown” for purposes of proving the newly-discovered facts exception to the time requirements of the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546, applies to pro se petitioners who are incarcerated. For the reasons discussed below, we hold that the pre*691sumption does not apply to pro se prisoner petitioners, and so we affirm the Superior Court’s order remanding the matter to the trial court for further proceedings.

I.…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Commonwealth v. BennettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  4. Commonwealth v. LarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. Commonwealth v. MarshallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008

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

3Cited by345 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Small, E., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  2. Commonwealth v. BrownSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  3. Commonwealth v. Staton, A., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  4. William Bracey v. Superintendent Rockview SCICourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2021
  5. Commonwealth v. ShilohSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

340 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