Commonwealth v. Halley

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 failure to perfect a requested direct appeal is the functional equivalent of having no representation at all
• holding that “the failure to file a Rule 1925(b
• holding failure to file timely Rule 1925(b) statement on behalf of criminal defendant constitutes per se ineffectiveness such that prejudice is legally presumed; remedy for such deprivation of fundamental right to appeal is its restoration
• noting the significant difference between “failures that completely foreclose appellate review, and those which may result in narrowing its ambit”
• noting the significant difference between “failures that completely foreclose appellate review, and those which may result in narrowing its ambit”
• noting the significant difference between “failures that completely foreclose appellate review, and those which may result in narrowing its ambit”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).