Com. v. Anderson, O.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that any claim for relief that is cognizable under the PCRA must be treated as a PCRA petition
• stating that “any claim for relief that is cognizable under the PCRA must be treated as a PCRA petition”
• stating that if a PCRA petition is untimely, neither PCRA court nor appellate court has jurisdiction to address the substantive claims
• “[A]ny claim for relief that is cognizable under the PCRA must be treated as a PCRA petition and titling a petition as a claim for a writ of habeas corpus does not avoid the PCRA’s timeliness requirements.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Com. v. Anderson, O.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2020-06-17· cited 1×
• Com. v. Keys, B.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2024-12-13

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Miller
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2014-09-26· cited 1,088×
• Commonwealth v. Fahy
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1999-08-27· cited 1,072×
• Commonwealth v. Muniz, J., Aplt.
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-07-19· cited 899×
• Commonwealth v. Taylor
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2013-04-19· cited 800×
• Commonwealth v. Albrecht
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2010-05-27· cited 770×
• Commonwealth v. Jones
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2012-09-28· cited 310×
• Commonwealth v. Murphy
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-02-20· cited 199×
• Com. Pennsylvania v. Smith
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-03-19· cited 136×
• Com. v. Anderson, O.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2020-06-17· cited 1×

Other cases named Com. v. Anderson, O.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Com. v. Anderson, O.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2020-06-17· cited 1×