Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Meehan

Citations

  • 628 A.2d 1151
  • 427 Pa. Super. 261
  • 1993 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2291

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that notwithstanding an appellant’s experience with the appellate system, quashal of an untimely -5- J.S27024/16 appeal is inappropriate where the lower court has not informed the appellant of his appellate rights
  • excusing untimeliness of an appeal from the denial of a PCRA petition, where the court failed to advise the petitioner of his right to appeal pursuant to Rule 908(E)
  • stating “we cannot say with certainty that the PCRA court's failure to follow the directives of Rule [907] had no effect on appellant's ability to perfect his appeal since he was incarcerated”
  • stating “we cannot say with certainty that the PCRA court’s failure to follow the directives of Rule [907] had no effect on appellant’s ability to perfect his appeal since he was incarcerated”
  • excusing the untimely filing of a notice of appeal, stating that “we cannot say with certainty that the PCRA court’s failure to follow the directives of Rule [908] had no effect on appellant’s ability to perfect his appeal….”
  • appeal periods cannot be enlarged except.in the case of fraud or breakdown of the process of a court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rowley, Cirillo, Brosky

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 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.