• Commonwealth v. Robinson

    Publication Date: 2024-08-16
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 1230 MDA 2023

    Court remanded Post Conviction Relief Act case on appeal where defendant alleged that he had been abandoned by PCRA counsel, which supported allowing the PCRA court to hold a Grazier hearing to determine whether defendant wished to be represented by counsel and appoint new counsel if necessary to allow defendant to pursue ineffective assistance claims against current counsel. Case remanded for further proceedings on Grazier claims. Bradley application for remand denied.

  • Commonwealth v. Ramirez-Contreras

    Publication Date: 2024-08-16
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 720 MDA 2023

    Plea counsel was deficient where she failed to investigate defendant's immigration status and thus failed to advise him of the immigration consequences of his guilty plea, where defendant's priority was to return to work to support his family in the U.S. Order of the Post Conviction Relief Act court reversed, conviction vacated.

  • Commonwealth v. Pearson

    Publication Date: 2024-08-16
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 1623 MDA 2023

    Appellant appealed the trial court's order denying his "notice of appeal." The court affirmed, holding that the trial court properly denied appellant's pleading, which was an untimely subsequent Post Conviction Relief Act petition that sought reinstatement of appellant's rights to appeal nunc pro tunc an order of the trial court that denied appellant's motion for DNA testing.

  • Marcy v. Superintendent Phoenix SCI

    Publication Date: 2024-08-16
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Circuit Judge Matey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1977

    Where federal courts had not previously expressly recognized a due process right to be free from incarceration based on recanted testimony, even when the government had no knowledge of the testimony's falsity, federal precedent barred a defendant from retroactively seeking application of such a right as a new rule of procedure on collateral review. Order of the district court affirmed.

  • United States v. Furxhiu

    Publication Date: 2024-08-16
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Slomsky
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 24-224

    The district court granted defendant's appeal from the Magistrate Judge's order granting the Government's motion for detention pending trial pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b) and released him pending trial with strict bail conditions.

  • Commonwealth v. Miyares

    Publication Date: 2024-08-16
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 574 WDA 2023

    Appellant appealed the trial court's judgment of sentence entered on his bench trial convictions for two counts of harassment. The court affirmed, holding that appellant's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence where appellant repeatedly directed a raised middle finger toward apartment neighbors' security camera, including one instance in which appellant shouted the term "gay bitch" as a personal, abusive epithet.

  • Commonwealth v. Carter

    Publication Date: 2024-08-09
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 432 WDA 2023

    Commonwealth appealed the trial court's order granting defendant's motion in limine to preclude "other bad acts" evidence from being introduced in defendant's criminal homicide trial. The court affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence showing that defendant shot a witness to his crime while they were both in another state, but that the trial court did err in excluding evidence that defendant fled to that state after committing his alleged Pennsylvania crime.

  • Commonwealth v. Couteret

    Publication Date: 2024-08-09
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Leavitt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 413 C.D. 2021

    Trial court erred in convicting hunting guide for unlawful taking of game/wildlife and use of unlawful devices/methods where the record demonstrated that defendant happened to encounter game while lawfully traveling along a public road and passed on the location of that game to hunters he had a chance encounter with. Order of the trial court reversed.

  • Commonwealth v. Boyd

    Publication Date: 2024-08-09
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Colins
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 2863 EDA 2023

    Appellant appealed the trial court's judgment of sentence entered on his bench trial conviction for indecent exposure and open lewdness. The court affirmed, holding that a complainant's trial testimony regarding appellant's conduct in exposing himself and masturbating on a public train was more than sufficient evidence to sustain appellant's convictions.

  • Commonwealth v. Smith

    Publication Date: 2024-08-09
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 593 MDA 2023

    Appellant appealed the trial court's judgment of sentence entered on his jury conviction for driving under the influence in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(d(1)(i) and (iii). The court affirmed, holding that the challenged statutory sections did not violate appellant's constitutional rights to equal protection, substantive due process, or procedural due process as a user of medical marijuana.