Comm. v. Davis, F. of: R. Saurman, Esq.
This text of Comm. v. Davis, F. of: R. Saurman, Esq. (Comm. v. Davis, F. of: R. Saurman, Esq.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : No. 22 MM 2018 : : v. : : : FREDERICK JOHN DAVIS : : : PETITION OF: ROBERT ALLEN : SAURMAN :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 6th day of April, 2018, in consideration of the Motion to Withdraw
and the Motion to Deny Attorney Withdrawal, this matter is REMANDED to the Court of
Common Pleas of Monroe County for that court to determine whether counsel should be
granted leave to withdraw. See Pa.R.Crim.P. 120(B) (providing that an attorney may not
unilaterally withdraw his or her appearance in a criminal matter; rather, a court must
determine whether leave to withdraw is warranted).
If the attorney is permitted to withdraw, the court is DIRECTED to determine
whether Frederick Davis is to be appointed new counsel or is to proceed pro se. The
Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County is DIRECTED to enter its order regarding this
remand within 45 days and to promptly notify this Court of its determination.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Comm. v. Davis, F. of: R. Saurman, Esq., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/comm-v-davis-f-of-r-saurman-esq-pa-2018.