Commonwealth v. Todaro

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Todaro

688 A.2d 165, 547 Pa. 2, 1996 Pa. LEXIS 2510

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 20, 1996·No. Petition No. 169 W.D. Allocatur Docket 1996·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 20th day of December, 1996, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED BUT LIMITED to the question of whether the Superior Court erred by denying Petitioner’s PCRA petition alleging that counsel was ineffective by failing to object to the submission of written instructions to the jury.

It is further ordered that the case be submitted on briefs and consolidated with Commonwealth v. Skibicki, 547 Pa. 1, 688 A.2d 165 (1996).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 20th day of December, 1996, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED BUT LIMITED to the question of whether the Superior Court erred by denying Petitioner’s PCRA petition alleging that counsel was ineffective by failing to object to the submission of written instructions to the jury.

It is further ordered that the case be submitted on briefs and consolidated with Commonwealth v. Skibicki, 547 Pa. 1, 688 A.2d 165 (1996).

Commonwealth v. Todaro, 688 A.2d 165, 547 Pa. 2, 1996 Pa. LEXIS 2510 (Pa. 1996).

Pincite

688 A.2d 165 (Commonwealth v. Todaro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related