Commonwealth v. Bynum-Hamilton

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the appellant's failure to file a separate Rule 2119 statement where counsel has sought to withdraw does not preclude review of whether the appellant's issue is frivolous
• reviewing appellant’s discretionary claim despite counsel’s failure to include Rule 2119(f) statement in Anders brief
• stating counsel’s petition to withdraw must advise an “[a]ppellant of his absolute right to proceed pro se or with privately retained counsel.”
• declining to waive a discretionary sentencing claim despite the absence of a Rule 2119(f) statement when counsel has requested to withdraw and filed an Anders brief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Griffin
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2016-10-18· cited 56×
• Com. v. Weitzel, E.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2023-11-06· cited 33×
• Commonwealth v. Evans
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-12-20· cited 6×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Anders v. California
  Supreme Court· 1967-05-08· cited 87,848×
• Commonwealth v. Santiago
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-08-25· cited 1,639×
• Commonwealth v. Evans
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2006-06-05· cited 933×
• Commonwealth v. Goodwin
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-06-13· cited 776×
• Commonwealth v. Allen
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2011-07-12· cited 339×
• Commonwealth v. Zeigler
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2015-03-20· cited 279×
• Commonwealth v. Prisk
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2011-01-28· cited 268×
• Commonwealth v. Wright
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2004-03-26· cited 227×
• Commonwealth v. Martuscelli
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2012-10-04· cited 159×
• Commonwealth v. Deluca
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1980-02-15· cited 29×