Commonwealth v. Steckley
41 A.3d 855, 615 Pa. 151, 2012 WL 1109434, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 732
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedApril 4, 2012
DocketNo. 681 MAL 2011
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases
This text of 41 A.3d 855 (Commonwealth v. Steckley) 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. Steckley, 41 A.3d 855, 615 Pa. 151, 2012 WL 1109434, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 732 (Pa. 2012).
Opinion
ORDER
AND NOW, this 4th day of April, 2012, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are:
(1) Whether the Superior Court erred in affirming the trial court’s imposition of a mandatory minimum given a failure to notify the Defendant/Appellant of the applicability of said mandatory minimum sentence pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9718.2(d)?
(2) Whether notice of the applicability of Section 9718.2 from defense counsel can satisfy Subsection 9718.2(d)’s notice requirement without violating attorney/client privilege and defense counsel’s duty to provide zealous representation?
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Com. v. Steckley, S., Jr.
128 A.3d 826 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2015)
Com. v. Prinkey, M.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2015
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
41 A.3d 855, 615 Pa. 151, 2012 WL 1109434, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 732, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-steckley-pa-2012.