Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 7/15/2009

Commonwealth v. Moore

Citations

978 A.2d 988
2009 Pa. Super. 134
2009 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2209
2009 WL 2085686

How courts have described this case

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

holding that trial courts have “the authority to grant or deny Appellant an extension of time in which to file his post-sentence motion”
holding that trial court had authority to grant motion for extension of time to file post-sentence motion filed eight days after Moore’s judgment of sentence
holding: “[t]he trial court clearly [has] the authority to grant or deny [an a]ppellant an extension of time in which to file his post-sentence motion”
holding: “[t]he trial court clearly [has] the authority to grant or deny [an a]ppellant an extension of time in which to file his post-sentence motion”
stating that a trial court has “the authority to grant or deny Appellant an extension of time in which to file his post-sentence motion”
noting that a request for nunc pro tunc relief is distinct from an order resolving the merits of a post-sentence motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bowes, Allen, Kelly

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.