Commonwealth v. Ice, C. of: J. Crisp, Esq.
This text of Commonwealth v. Ice, C. of: J. Crisp, Esq. (Commonwealth v. Ice, C. of: J. Crisp, Esq.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : No. 74 MM 2018 : : v. : : : CRAIG DAVID ICE : : : PETITION OF: JONATHAN W. CRISP, : ESQUIRE :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 5th day of July, 2018, in consideration of the Application for Leave
to Withdraw as Counsel, this matter is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of
Dauphin County for that court to determine whether counsel should be granted leave to
withdraw. See Pa.R.Crim.P. 120(B) (providing that an attorney may not unilaterally
withdraw his or her appearance in a criminal matter; rather, a court must determine
whether leave to withdraw is warranted).
If the attorney is permitted to withdraw, the court is DIRECTED to determine
whether Craig David Ice is to be appointed new counsel or is to proceed pro se. The
Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County is DIRECTED to enter its order regarding this
remand within 45 days and to promptly notify this Court of its determination.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Commonwealth v. Ice, C. of: J. Crisp, Esq., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-ice-c-of-j-crisp-esq-pa-2018.