Commonwealth v. Gray

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Gray

382 A.2d 748, 252 Pa. Super. 621

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided February 7, 1978·No. Appeal, No. 1599·Published

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Judgment of sentence vacated. The case is remanded for the entry of post-trial motions nunc pro tunc.

JACOBS and PRICE, JJ., dissent. VAN der VOORT, J., dissents and would remand to the lower court for a determination of whether appellant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to file post-trial motions. Commonwealth v. Tate, 464 Pa. 25, 346 A.2d 1 (1975); Commonwealth v. Schroth, 458 Pa. 233, 328 A.2d 168 (1974).

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

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Judgment of sentence vacated. The case is remanded for the entry of post-trial motions nunc pro tunc.

JACOBS and PRICE, JJ., dissent. VAN der VOORT, J., dissents and would remand to the lower court for a determination of whether appellant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to file post-trial motions. Commonwealth v. Tate, 464 Pa. 25, 346 A.2d 1 (1975); Commonwealth v. Schroth, 458 Pa. 233, 328 A.2d 168 (1974).

Commonwealth v. Gray, 382 A.2d 748, 252 Pa. Super. 621 (Pa. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

382 A.2d 748 (Commonwealth v. Gray) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related