Commonwealth v. Fusselman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that although “[a] Turner/Finley no[-]merit letter is the appropriate filing [in a PCRA proceeding,] . . . because an Anders brief provides greater protection to the defendant, we may accept an Anders brief in lieu of a Turner/Finley letter”
• holding that although “[a] Turner/Finley no[-]merit letter is the appropriate filing [in a PCRA proceeding,] . . . because an Anders brief provides greater protection to the defendant, we may accept an Anders brief in lieu of a Turner/Finley letter”
• holding that although “[a] Turner/Finley no[-]merit letter is the appropriate filing [in a PCRA proceeding,] . . . because an Anders brief provides greater protection to the defendant, we may accept an Anders brief in lieu of a Turner/Finley letter”
• holding that although “[a] Turner/Finley no[-]merit letter is the appropriate filing [in a PCRA proceeding,] . . . because an Anders brief provides greater protection to the defendant, we may accept an Anders brief in lieu of a Turner/Finley letter”
• holding that although “[a] Turner/Finley no merit letter is the appropriate filing [in a PCRA proceeding,] . . . because an Anders brief provides greater protection to the defendant, we may accept an Anders brief in lieu of a Turner/Finley letter”
• recognizing that direct appeal procedure imposes stricter requirements than Turner/Finley

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).