Hobbs v. Sharp

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a petitioner may not seek relief by way of a writ of coram nobis “merely because the PCRA refuses to remedy a petitioner’s grievance”
• explaining that other remedies do “not become available merely because the PCRA [court] refuses to remedy a petitioner’s grievance; rather, we look at the claims a petitioner is raising”
• stating that “[u]nder the plain words of the [PCRA], if the underlying substantive claim is one that could potentially be remedied under the PCRA, that claim is exclusive to the PCRA.” (emphasis in original)
• explaining “if the underlying substantive claim is one that could potentially be remedied under the PCRA, that claim is exclusive to the PCRA.”
• explaining “if the underlying substantive claim is one that could potentially be remedied under the PCRA, that claim is exclusive to the PCRA.”
• explaining “if the underlying substantive claim is one that could potentially be remedied under the PCRA, that claim is exclusive to the PCRA.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).