Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2/21/2014
Commonwealth v. Myers
Citations
- 86 A.3d 286
- 2014 Pa. Super. 30
- 2014 WL 688225
- 2014 Pa. Super. LEXIS 96
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- observing that if appellant’s Rule 1925(b) statement was late, “we would be obligated as a matter of our rules of procedure to deem appellate counsel ineffective and to remand for the filing of a Statement nunc pro tunc.”
- observing that if an appellant's Rule 1925(b) statement were late, “we would be obligated as a matter of our rules of procedure to deem appellate counsel ineffective and to remand for the filing of a Statement nunc pro tunc.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Donohue, Strassburger, Wecht
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Commonwealth v. CastilloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2005-12-29· cited 725×
- Commonwealth v. EichingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-02-20· cited 275×
- Commonwealth v. BruceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-01-04· cited 261×
- Commonwealth v. AhmadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2008-11-18· cited 258×
- Commonwealth v. TruesdaleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1972-11-17· cited 90×
- Commonwealth v. PenrodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-07-25· cited 52×
- Commonwealth v. OckenhouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-08-21· cited 38×
- Commonwealth v. GamberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1986-03-31· cited 36×
- Commonwealth v. WashingtonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-05-28· cited 34×
- Commonwealth v. TorresSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-08-17· cited 13×
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.