Commonwealth v. Kretchmar

679 A.2d 774, 545 Pa. 41, 1996 Pa. LEXIS 1583
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided August 7, 1996·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 7th day of August, 1996, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, limited to the issues of: (1) whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to introduce at trial records from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, which would show that Petr sold a .22 caliber rifle prior to the murder; (2) whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to obtain and introduce at trial newspaper articles published after the murder, which revealed that the victim had been shot in the head; (3) whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present testimony of a representative of the National Football League to show that [775] the Commonwealth’s witness was not employed by the National Football League at the time of the killing; and (4) whether appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the substance of the above issues.

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

Commonwealth v. Kretchmar, 679 A.2d 774, 545 Pa. 41, 1996 Pa. LEXIS 1583 (Pa. 1996).

679 A.2d 774 (Commonwealth v. Kretchmar) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Kretchmar
971 A.2d 1249 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2009)