Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the trial court’s misstatement of appeal period constituted a breakdown in the court’s operation
• concluding no substantial question raised where appellant claimed excessive sentence and court failed to adequately consider sentencing factors
• recognizing a claim that a sentence imposed after probation revocation was excessive is treated as a challenge to the discretionary aspects of sentencing
• explaining that this Court may decline to quash an untimely appeal if “the problem arose as a result of the trial court’s misstatement of the appeal period, which operated as a breakdown in the court’s operation.”
• explaining that this Court may decline to quash an untimely appeal if “the problem arose as a result of the trial court’s misstatement of the appeal period, which operated as a breakdown in the court’s operation.”
• declining to quash an appeal where the failure to file a timely appeal was the result of the trial court’s misstatement of the appeal period

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).