Commonwealth v. Pollard

How courts have described this case

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

• employing conventional PCRA timeliness analysis despite fact the defendant was sentenced in absentia
• “Although Appellant makes bald assertions of interference by governmental officials and after-discovered evidence, he has failed to offer any argument regarding how these time-bar exceptions apply to his case”
• rejecting bald assertions of interference by government officials

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Fowler
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-07-23· cited 444×
• Commonwealth v. Taylor
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-09-07· cited 244×
• Commonwealth v. Valentine
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-07-05· cited 80×
• Commonwealth v. Concordia
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2014-07-23· cited 77×
• Commonwealth v. Gonzalez
  Berks County Court of Common Pleas· 2009-07-24
• Commonwealth v. Future
  Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas· 2015-02-02

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Turner
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-07-27· cited 4,184×
• Commonwealth v. Finley
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-10-31· cited 4,104×
• Commonwealth v. Gamboa-Taylor
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-06-19· cited 603×
• Commonwealth v. Robinson
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-10-22· cited 552×
• Commonwealth v. Murray
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-05-19· cited 369×
• Commonwealth v. Wharton
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2005-11-28· cited 309×
• Commonwealth v. Bretz
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-08-15· cited 94×
• Commonwealth v. Vega
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-06-16· cited 87×