Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Spotz

Citations

  • 18 A.3d 244
  • 610 Pa. 17
  • 2011 Pa. LEXIS 1030

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that a claim that has been previously litigated is not cognizable under the PCRA
  • finding “one sentence does not constitute a developed, reasoned, supported, or even intelligible argument”; “matter is waived for lack of development”
  • finding “one sentence does not constitute a developed, reasoned, supported, or even intelligible argument”; “matter is waived for lack of development”
  • “[C]ounsel cannot argue his or her own ineffectiveness[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Baer, Castille, Eakin, McCAFFERY, Melvin, Orie, Part II, Saylor, Todd

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

113 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

122 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.