Commonwealth v. Holcomb

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Holcomb

396 A.2d 29, 261 Pa. Super. 532

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided November 17, 1978·No. Appeal, 527·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant’s brief being so defective as to be useless to the Court, the appeal is quashed in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 2101. See also, Rule 2118, Pa.R.A.P., and Commonwealth v. Wyant, 254 Pa.Super. 464, 386 A.2d 43 (1978). The prothonotary is directed to send a copy of this order directly to appellant.

JACOBS, P. J., and SPAETH, J., would affirm. WATKINS, former P. J., and HOFFMAN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant’s brief being so defective as to be useless to the Court, the appeal is quashed in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 2101. See also, Rule 2118, Pa.R.A.P., and Commonwealth v. Wyant, 254 Pa.Super. 464, 386 A.2d 43 (1978). The prothonotary is directed to send a copy of this order directly to appellant.

JACOBS, P. J., and SPAETH, J., would affirm. WATKINS, former P. J., and HOFFMAN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Commonwealth v. Holcomb, 396 A.2d 29, 261 Pa. Super. 532 (Pa. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

396 A.2d 29 (Commonwealth v. Holcomb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related