Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Smith

Citations

  • 194 A.3d 126

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that defendant did not satisfy due diligence requirement by offering no reasonable explanation for a 13-year delay in obtaining affidavit
  • holding that defendant did not satisfy due diligence requirement by offering no reasonable explanation for a 13-year delay in obtaining new evidence
  • concluding that petitioner’s lack of due diligence was apparent on the face of the record, where petitioner knew of potential witness years before securing an affidavit from him
  • holding that petitioner did not exercise due diligence to obtain witness’s affidavit when pre-trial discovery indicated that witness had made a statement to police but petitioner did not request the statement or pursue affidavit for over 13 years
  • holding that petitioner did not exercise due diligence -9- J-A08045-23 to obtain witness’s affidavit when pre-trial discovery indicated that witness had made a statement to police but petitioner did not request the statement or pursue affidavit for over 13 years
  • providing that, under both governmental interference exception and newly discovered facts exception, petitioner must show that he acted with due diligence in obtaining witness affidavit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bender, Stabile, Platt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.