Commonwealth v. Hill

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Hill

864 A.2d 1201

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 29, 2004·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2004, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby DENIED. Pursuant to Commonwealth v. Grant, 572 Pa. 48, 813 A.2d 726 (2002), petitioner’s ineffectiveness claim pertaining to trial counsel’s failure to pursue a jury charge cautioning the jury that he was denied the opportunity for an objective identification at a pretrial line-up under Commonwealth v. Sexton, 485 Pa. 17, 400 A.2d 1289 (1979), is dismissed without prejudice until collateral review. Jurisdiction relinquished.

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, 2004, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby DENIED. Pursuant to Commonwealth v. Grant, 572 Pa. 48, 813 A.2d 726 (2002), petitioner’s ineffectiveness claim pertaining to trial counsel’s failure to pursue a jury charge cautioning the jury that he was denied the opportunity for an objective identification at a pretrial line-up under Commonwealth v. Sexton, 485 Pa. 17, 400 A.2d 1289 (1979), is dismissed without prejudice until collateral review. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Commonwealth v. Hill, 864 A.2d 1201 (Pa. 2004).

Pincite

864 A.2d 1201 (Commonwealth v. Hill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related