Whiting v. McClamma

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 appropriate remedy where PCRA court did not have jurisdiction to grant petitioner’s request to file an appeal nunc pro tunc is to quash the subsequent appeal
• stating that “before a petitioner may benefit from Subsection 9545(b)(1)(ii)’s exception, the petitioner must plead he filed his PCRA petition within sixty days of the date it could have been presented[.]”
• quashing appeal and therefore not addressing allegation that prior appeal counsel abandoned the defendant by not filing an appellate brief
• time limitations imposed by PCRA implicate trial court’s jurisdiction and may not be altered or disregarded in order to address merits of petition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).