Commonwealth v. Cooper

987 A.2d 715, 605 Pa. 130, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 2909

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 29, 2009·No. 513 EAL 2009·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

Are the Superior Court’s holdings in Commonwealth v. Mincavage, 945 A.2d 233 (Pa.Super.2008), and in the present case, in direct conflict with the Rules of Criminal Procedure and Rules of Appellate Procedure, specifically Pa.R.Crim.P. 720 and 721 and Pa.R.A.P 1701 and 3304?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

Are the Superior Court’s holdings in Commonwealth v. Mincavage, 945 A.2d 233 (Pa.Super.2008), and in the present case, in direct conflict with the Rules of Criminal Procedure and Rules of Appellate Procedure, specifically Pa.R.Crim.P. 720 and 721 and Pa.R.A.P 1701 and 3304?

Commonwealth v. Cooper, 987 A.2d 715, 605 Pa. 130, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 2909 (Pa. 2009).

Pincite

987 A.2d 715 (Commonwealth v. Cooper) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

O'Connor v. City of Philadelphia Board of Ethics

987 A.2d 715 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2009)

Opinion

Related