Commonwealth v. Patterson

567 A.2d 690, 389 Pa. Super. 450, 1989 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3740
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 15, 1989·No. No. 2478·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

KELLY, Judge:

On August 25, 1989, this Court filed a memorandum which granted appellant’s counsel’s motion to withdraw on frivolity grounds. Appellant was informed in the memorandum of his right to proceed then with the appeal “pro se, or by privately retained counsel, or not at all.” See Commonwealth v. Turner, 518 Pa. 491, 495, 544 A.2d 927, 929 (1988). This Court specifically granted appellant 30 days from the date of the filing of the memorandum to file a brief. The dead-line for filing has long since past with only stoney silence from appellant.

Turner does not indicate how or when an appellant must chose between proceeding “pro se, or by privately retained counsel, or not at all.” No rule has since been promulgated. In the absence of an express rule, we consider appellant’s failure to file a brief within 30 days, as directed, to be an election of the third alternative identified in Turner.

Appeal dismissed, with prejudice.

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

Commonwealth v. Patterson, 567 A.2d 690, 389 Pa. Super. 450, 1989 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3740 (Pa. Ct. App. 1989).

567 A.2d 690 (Commonwealth v. Patterson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lincoln General Insurance v. Gracie Corp. of N.J.
28 Pa. D. & C.5th 419 (Chester County Court of Common Pleas, 2013)
White Oak Builders Inc. v. East Penn Mortgage Co.
7 Pa. D. & C.5th 215 (Monroe County Court of Common Pleas, 2006)
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez
587 A.2d 786 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1991)