Commonwealth v. Reid

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Reid

359 A.2d 769, 467 Pa. 611, 1976 Pa. LEXIS 647

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 6, 1976

DocketNo. 58

StatusPublished

This text of 359 A.2d 769 (Commonwealth v. Reid) 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. Reid, 359 A.2d 769, 467 Pa. 611, 1976 Pa. LEXIS 647 (Pa. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This case was before us on direct appeal. Commonwealth v. Reid, 448 Pa. 288, 292 A.2d 297 (1972). In that appeal we decided that the evidence introduced at appellant’s trial Was sufficient to sustain his conviction of murder in the first degree. This is an appeal from a denial of relief on a PCHA petition. The only issue preserved for presentation to this Court is the effectiveness of appellant’s trial counsel. Appellant alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to call several witnesses who would have testified that appellant was in New Jersey three days after the murder in Harrisburg, [613]*613Pennsylvania. The PCHA court apparently found, and we agree, that appellant’s presence in New Jersey three days after the crime was irrelevant to his guilt or innocence.

Order affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This case was before us on direct appeal. Commonwealth v. Reid, 448 Pa. 288, 292 A.2d 297 (1972). In that appeal we decided that the evidence introduced at appellant’s trial Was sufficient to sustain his conviction of murder in the first degree. This is an appeal from a denial of relief on a PCHA petition. The only issue preserved for presentation to this Court is the effectiveness of appellant’s trial counsel. Appellant alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to call several witnesses who would have testified that appellant was in New Jersey three days after the murder in Harrisburg, [613]*613Pennsylvania. The PCHA court apparently found, and we agree, that appellant’s presence in New Jersey three days after the crime was irrelevant to his guilt or innocence.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

359 A.2d 769, 467 Pa. 611, 1976 Pa. LEXIS 647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-reid-pa-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack