Commonwealth v. Stein

257 A.2d 848, 436 Pa. 328, 1969 Pa. LEXIS 667
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 20, 1969
DocketNo. 3162A Miscellaneous Docket
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 257 A.2d 848 (Commonwealth v. Stein) 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. Stein, 257 A.2d 848, 436 Pa. 328, 1969 Pa. LEXIS 667 (Pa. 1969).

Opinion

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The petition for allocatur consists of a xeroxed copy of a letter from petitioner to counsel, requesting counsel to file an allocatur petition. Since such a petition does not accord with counsel’s required role as an advocate, see Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674, 675, 78 S. Ct. 974, 975 (1958), the case must he remanded so that counsel may file a proper petition. See Commonwealth v. Stancell, 435 Pa. 301, 256 A. 2d 798 (1969); Pa. Supreme Ct. Rule 69 (petitions for allowance of appeal must set forth particularly the questions involved and the reasons in favor of granting the petition) ; cf. Commonwealth v. Villano, 435 Pa. 273, 256 A. 2d 468 (1969).

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Hoerner
260 A.2d 184 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1969)
Commonwealth v. Stein
260 A.2d 467 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
257 A.2d 848, 436 Pa. 328, 1969 Pa. LEXIS 667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-stein-pa-1969.