Commonwealth., Pet v. Gathright, R.

121 A.3d 434, 632 Pa. 447, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 1764
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided August 14, 2015·No. 118 EAL 2014·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 14th day of August, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED, the order of the Superior Court is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED for consideration by the trial court consistent with Commonwealth v. Carrasquillo, 631 Pa. 692, 115 A.3d 1284, 1292 (2015) (holding “a defendant’s innocence claim must be at least plausible to demonstrate, in and of itself, a fair and just reason *448 for presentenee withdrawal of a plea” and “the proper inquiry on consideration of such a withdrawal motion is whether the accused has made some colorable demonstration, under the circumstances, such that permitting withdrawal of the plea would promote fairness and justice”). Jurisdiction relinquished.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Commonwealth., Pet v. Gathright, R., 121 A.3d 434, 632 Pa. 447, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 1764 (Pa. 2015).

121 A.3d 434 (Commonwealth., Pet v. Gathright, R.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Com. v. Gathright, R.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2018