Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Johnson

Citations

  • 852 A.2d 315
  • 2004 Pa. Super. 155
  • 2004 Pa. Super. LEXIS 823

How courts have described this case

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

  • refusing to consider the Commonwealth’s argument on appeal that the Rule 600 deadline had not passed, as it was inconsistent with the position that the Commonwealth had taken at the evidentiary hearing
  • vacating judgment of sentence and discharging Johnson because “there was a dearth of evidence to support the Commonwealth’s arguments, and it therefore did not carry its burden to establish due diligence in bringing Johnson to trial within the required time.”
  • Commonwealth could not establish due diligence, for purposes of a Rule 600 motion, by relying solely upon unsworn representations of an assistant district attorney
  • unsworn statements by counsel are not enough to prove diligence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Klein, Kelly, Popovich

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 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.