Commonwealth v. Maple

How courts have described this case

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

• providing that the appointment of counsel after original PCRA counsel has been permitted to withdraw under Turner/Finley is unnecessary and improper
• finding that the appointment of second counsel after original post-conviction counsel has been permitted to withdraw pursuant to Finley is unnecessary and improper
• stating that where appointed post-conviction counsel has been permitted to withdraw pursuant to Turner/Finley, the appointment of new counsel is unnecessary and improper
• stating that when post-conviction counsel has been permitted to withdraw, new counsel shall not be appointed
• holding that the right to counsel in proceedings under the PCRA is fully vindicated when the petitioner is provided counsel who conducts a complete review of the record and determines that no issues of even arguable merit exist, and where the court, after its own review, agrees
• the appointment of counsel after original post-conviction counsel has been permitted to withdraw pursuant to Finley, supra is “unnecessary and improper

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).