Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 7/18/2018

Commonwealth v. Barbour, D., Aplt.

Citations

189 A.3d 944

How courts have described this case

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

holding that periods of delay caused by a defendant after the expiration of the Rule 600 time period are irrelevant to the computation of delay
stating that “[b]y the terms of Rule 600, the Commonwealth must bring a defendant to trial within 365 days from the date upon which a written criminal complaint is filed.”
stating, “where a defendant voluntarily fails to appear for a required court proceeding, the resulting delay is attributable to him[, or her,] alone, and shall be excluded from the time chargeable to the Commonwealth”
a defendant’s absence, from pre- trial proceedings at which his appearance is required, results in the time being excludable
“[T]he Rule 600 run date may be adjusted pursuant to the computational directives set forth in Subsection (C) of the Rule.”
“the Commonwealth’s failure to bring the defendant to trial before the expiration of the Rule 600 time period constitutes grounds for dismissal of the charges with prejudice”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Saylor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

35 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.