Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera

938 A.2d 987, 595 Pa. 405, 2007 Pa. LEXIS 2700

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedDecember 21, 2007

Docket341 MAL 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 938 A.2d 987 (Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera) 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.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera, 938 A.2d 987, 595 Pa. 405, 2007 Pa. LEXIS 2700 (Pa. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 21st day of December, 2007, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED, the Order of the Superior Court is VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED for the Superior Court to address Petitioner’s argument that the sentence imposed by the trial court violated his Fifth Amendment rights under Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454, 101 S.Ct. 1866, 68 L.Ed.2d 359 (1981), and Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314, 119 S.Ct. 1307, 143 L.Ed.2d 424 (1999). See Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera, 927 A.2d 656 *406 (Pa.Super.2007) Middle District Appeal 2006 (Pa.Super.), Brief of Appellant at 14-16, 22.

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 21st day of December, 2007, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED, the Order of the Superior Court is VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED for the Superior Court to address Petitioner’s argument that the sentence imposed by the trial court violated his Fifth Amendment rights under Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454, 101 S.Ct. 1866, 68 L.Ed.2d 359 (1981), and Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314, 119 S.Ct. 1307, 143 L.Ed.2d 424 (1999). See Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera, 927 A.2d 656 *406 (Pa.Super.2007) Middle District Appeal 2006 (Pa.Super.), Brief of Appellant at 14-16, 22.

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

938 A.2d 987, 595 Pa. 405, 2007 Pa. LEXIS 2700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-olmeda-rivera-pa-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack