Commonwealth v. Schultz

261 A.2d 106, 215 Pa. Super. 714
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided June 5, 1969·No. Appeals, Nos. 94 and 95·Published

Opinion

Opinion

Per Curiam :

The court below dismissed appellant’s post-conviction petition which alleged only denial of the right to appeal from guilty pleas. It did not independently determine the legality of the sentence and voluntariness of the pleas as required by Commonwealth v. Walters, 431 Pa. 74, note 1 at page 76, 244 A. 2d 757 (1968). Appellant shall be allowed to amend his petition, if possible, to allege specific, nonfrivolous facts not controverted by the record and pertaining to the sentence or plea which, if true, entitle him to relief. If such amendment is made, the necessary determination shall be made only after a full and fair evidentiary hearing on the facts alleged.

Accordingly, the order of the court is vacated and the record remanded for this determination.

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

Commonwealth v. Schultz, 261 A.2d 106, 215 Pa. Super. 714 (Pa. Ct. App. 1969).

261 A.2d 106 (Commonwealth v. Schultz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Walters
244 A.2d 757 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1968)