Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
456 results for '* topic:"Criminal Appeals"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2020-07-06
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Strassburger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0695
In this case involving a sex offender, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing an internet restriction as a special condition of defendant's probation revocation sentencewhere he failed to comply with the terms of his probation and was unable/unwilling to act in a manner that would not place the community in danger. The superior court affirmed the judgment of sentence.
Publication Date: 2020-07-06
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Lazarus
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0694
Defendant's motion for DNA testing under 42 Pa.C.S. §9543.1 constituted a separate and distinct litigation from his appeal from an unsuccessful Post Conviction Relief Act petition; therefore, the PCRA court erred in finding that it lacked jurisdiction to address his motion due to a pending PCRA appeal. The superior court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence after considering the merits.
Publication Date: 2020-07-06
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Strassburger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0695
In this case involving a sex offender, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing an internet restriction as a special condition of defendant's probation revocation sentencewhere he failed to comply with the terms of his probation and was unable/unwilling to act in a manner that would not place the community in danger. The superior court affirmed the judgment of sentence.
Publication Date: 2020-07-06
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge McLaughlin
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0696
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to disclose the identity of two confidential informants involved in a supervised drug buy where he failed to explain how testimony from these informants could have aided in his defense. The superior court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.
Publication Date: 2020-06-29
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge McLaughlin
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0669
The trial courtproperly denied defendant's untimely Post Conviction Relief Act petition where he filed the petition more than a year after his judgment of sentence became final without pleading or proving any exception to the PCRA time-bar. The superior court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2020-06-22
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Rendell
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0649
District court erred in denying appellant's motion arguing his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue that trial judge erred by not personally inviting appellant to speak during sentencing and court found rule 32 was not satisfied if the sentencing judge asked defendant's attorney if defendant wished to speak but failed to address defendant himself. Vacated and remanded.
Publication Date: 2020-06-22
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Olson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0633
The trial courtdid not err in imposing upon defendant restitution in accordance with 18 Pa.C.S. §1106for violating the state's Dog Law where defendant allowed one of his dogs to come loose, resulting in an attack on the neighbor's catand $9,331 in required veterinary services. The superior court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.
Publication Date: 2020-06-22
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Musmanno
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0634
Police lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct a protective weapons search of defendant and his vehicle where defendant did not display extreme nervousness or make any furtive movements during a traffic stop and police did not observe any weapons in plain view. The superior court affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Publication Date: 2020-06-22
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Colins
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0636
The trial courtdid not abuse its discretion in holding that further inquiry into jurydeliberations was not warranted in this case since the comments highlighted by a specific juror did not show that racial animus was a significant motivating factorin the jurors' vote to convict defendant. The superior court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.
Publication Date: 2020-06-15
Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Colins
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0606
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the commonwealth's request to have a comfort dog present during the testimony of an autistic minor as there was no inherent prejudice in the presence of the dog in the courtroom and the trial court was not required to find a compelling "necessity" for the dog's presence. The superior court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read