Commonwealth v. Simler
This text of 421 A.2d 451 (Commonwealth v. Simler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant was convicted by a jury of simple assault, 18 Pa.C.S. § 2701. Sufficiency of the evidence was the only issue raised by trial counsel in post-verdict motions, which were denied. Represented by new counsel in this direct appeal, appellant raises both the sufficiency of the evidence and four new issues of trial counsel’s alleged ineffectiveness.1 We are unable to resolve the ineffectiveness issues on the record before us. We shall therefore vacate the judgment of sentence, and remand for an evidentiary hearing. If the court below determines that trial counsel was not ineffective, it shall reinstate the judgment of sentence. If it determines that counsel was ineffective, it shall order a new trial. The parties may appeal the lower court’s order. Appellant may also raise the issue of sufficiency of the evidence at that time. Commonwealth v. Twiggs, 460 Pa. 105, 111 & n.6, 331 A.2d 440, 443 & n.6 (1975).
Judgment of sentence vacated, and case remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
421 A.2d 451, 280 Pa. Super. 154, 1980 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-simler-pasuperct-1980.