Commonwealth v. Nischan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the pro se post-sentence motion filed by the counseled defendant “was a nullity, having no legal effect.”
• concluding that defendant’s pro se post- sentence motion, filed when defendant was represented by counsel, was “a nullity, having no legal effect”
• holding that a represented defendant’s pro se post-sentence motion “was a nullity, having no legal effect”
• holding that a represented defendant’s pro se post-sentence motion “was a nullity, having no legal effect”
• concluding that defendant’s pro se post-sentence motion, filed when defendant was represented by counsel, was “a nullity, having no legal effect”
• holding that appellant’s pro se motion was a nullity having no legal effect because he was represented by counsel at the time of filing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).