Commonwealth v. Carr

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “claim[s] that counsel was ineffective will not save an untimely PCRA petition”
• holding that “claim[s] that counsel was ineffective will not save an untimely PCRA petition”
• holding that mere allegation of counsel’s ineffectiveness was insufficient to avoid PCRA time bar, where phone call to counsel or clerk of courts would have revealed counsel’s failure to file appeal
• holding that trial counsel’s failure to file direct appeal was discoverable during appellant’s one-year window to file timely PCRA petition; “A phone call to his attorney or the clerk of courts would have readily revealed that no appeal had been filed”
• holding that mere allegation of counsel’s ineffectiveness * Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court. J.S52042/14 was insufficient to avoid PCRA time bar, where phone call to counsel or clerk of courts would have revealed counsel’s failure to file appeal
• holding that trial counsel’s failure to file direct appeal was discoverable during appellant’s one-year window to file timely PCRA petition; “A phone call to his attorney or the clerk of courts would have readily revealed that no appeal had been filed”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).