Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Mayle

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 10, 2001PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

¶ 1 Appellant, Robert Junior Mayle, asks us to determine whether the Commonwealth’s failure to bring Appellant to trial within the time periods set forth by Article III and Article IV of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD), 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 9101, warrant dismissal of the charges against him. We hold that the Commonwealth was required to request a continuance once it became clear that Appellant could not be tried within the time periods mandated under the IAD and that the Commonwealth’s failure to do so warrants dismissal of the charges. Thus we reverse the judgment of sentence and…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. New York v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Alabama v. BozemanSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Commonwealth v. FisherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  4. Commonwealth v. HammSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Commonwealth v. GonceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. JonesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  2. Walker v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2006
  3. State v. BrownSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2008
  4. Monroe v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
  5. Commonwealth v. ThurstonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

11 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