Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 5/18/2000

Commonwealth Ex Rel. Baldwin v. Richard

Citations

751 A.2d 647
561 Pa. 489
2000 Pa. LEXIS 1273

How courts have described this case

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

“Because Appellant fails to present any evidence demonstrating that the alleged delay in instituting the present action caused him prejudice, [the laches] issue is without merit.”
Court noting that the “issue of what constitutes an infamous crime for the purpose of eligibility to hold public office is a substantial question subject to repetition....”
“[W]e have held that the definition espoused in Shaver was ‘not sufficiently inclusive for the modern era[.]’”
“Although Appellant’s offenses are reprehensible, they are not of such nature as to be a constitutional impediment to his holding office.”
courts of common pleas are without authority to permit plea bargain that would permit convicted felon to stay in office in contravention of the Pennsylvania Constitution
Court noting that the \issue of what constitutes an infamous crime for the purpose of eligibility to hold public office is a substantial question subject to repetition. . . .\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Zappala, Flaherty, Zarpala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

32 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.