Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1/23/2009

Commonwealth v. Daniels

Citations

963 A.2d 409
600 Pa. 1
2009 Pa. LEXIS 175

How courts have described this case

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

holding that, where PCRA court failed to explain the basis for its conclusion that claims were meritless, we could not conduct meaningful appellate review
recognizing that “[a] failure to satisfy any prong of the ineffectiveness test requires rejection of the claim of ineffectiveness.” (citation omitted)
holding that, where PCRA court failed to explain the basis for its conclusion that claims were meritless, we could not conduct meaningful appellate review
holding that a failure to satisfy any prong of the ineffectiveness test requires rejection of the claim of ineffectiveness
stating that a failure to satisfy any prong of the ineffectiveness test requires rejection of the claim of ineffectiveness
stating that the “failure to satisfy any prong of the ineffectiveness test requires rejection of the claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Castille, Saylor, Eakin, Baer, Todd, McCaffery, Greenspan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

51 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

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

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.