Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Cherry

Citations

  • 155 A.3d 1080
  • 2017 Pa. Super. 28
  • 2017 WL 474462
  • 2017 Pa. Super. LEXIS 72

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that “[i]f appointed counsel fails to take either of these steps, our courts have not hesitated to find that the petition was effectively uncounseled.”
  • stating that “[w]hen appointed, counsel's duty is to either (1) amend the petitioner’s pro se Petition and present the petitioner’s claims in acceptable legal terms, or (2) certify that the claims lack merit by complying with the mandates of Turner/Finley.”
  • declining to decide counsel’s application to withdraw and remanding for determination of whether appointed counsel “will continue to represent [Cherry] in the PCRA court”
  • “When appointed, counsel’s duty is to either (1) amend the petitioner’s pro se Petition and present the petitioner’s claims in acceptable legal terms, or (2) certify that the claims lack merit by complying with the mandates of Turner/Finley.”
  • “When appointed, counsel’s duty is to either (1) amend the petitioner’s pro se Petition and present the petitioner’s claims in acceptable legal terms, or (2) certify that the claims lack merit by complying with the mandates of Turner/Finley.” (footnote omitted)
  • requiring appointment of counsel only for first PCRA petitions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stabile, Dubow, Platt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.