Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Santiago
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided August 25, 2009No. 52 EAP 2008PublishedCited by 1,090 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Chief Justice CASTILLE.
In this case, court-appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders 1 brief and an accompanying petition to withdraw from representation on the grounds that his client’s direct appeal is wholly frivolous. We assumed plenary jurisdiction to review the Superior Court’s determination that counsel’s brief failed to meet the requirements of Anders and Commonwealth v. McClendon, 495 Pa. 467, 434 A.2d 1185 (1981), and to consider Pennsylvania’s current procedure for withdrawal of counsel in Anders cases. For the reasons that follow, we agree with the Superior Court’s…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Penson v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Griffin v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,090 opinions
- Commonwealth v. CartretteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Commonwealth v. FlowersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Commonwealth v. OrellanaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Commonwealth v. DanielsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Commonwealth v. DempsterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
1,085 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.