Commonwealth v. Monaco

How courts have described this case

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

• holding appellant did not satisfy newly-discovered fact exception where he failed to exercise due diligence in ascertaining diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”
• explaining that the PCRA petitioner must “explain why he could not have obtained the new fact(s) …. This rule is strictly enforced”
• holding no court has jurisdiction to hear an untimely PCRA petition
• holding Monaco did not satisfy newly discovered fact exception where, inter alia, he did not allege post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) impaired his ability to raise his substantive claim in timely manner, and thus his PTSD diagnosis did not fall within narrow Cruz holding
• “Significantly, Appellant does not allege his PTSD impaired his mental ability to raise or communicate his claim; thus, Appellant’s PTSD diagnosis does not fall within the narrow Cruz holding.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).