Thompson v. Thompson. Pet of: Clarion Dom. Rel.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Thompson v. Thompson. Pet of: Clarion Dom. Rel.

195 A.3d 168

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided October 3, 2018·No. 232 WAL 2018 (Granted)·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM .

AND NOW, this 3rd day of October, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner is:

Did the Superior Court of Pennsylvania err in determining that the suspended sentence imposed by the trial court's February 15, 2017 order was an illegal, indefinitely suspended sentence, rather than a sentence to probation, which is a sanctioned punishment under 23 Pa.C.S. § 4354(a)?

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

PER CURIAM .

AND NOW, this 3rd day of October, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner is:

Did the Superior Court of Pennsylvania err in determining that the suspended sentence imposed by the trial court's February 15, 2017 order was an illegal, indefinitely suspended sentence, rather than a sentence to probation, which is a sanctioned punishment under 23 Pa.C.S. § 4354(a)?

Thompson v. Thompson. Pet of: Clarion Dom. Rel., 195 A.3d 168 (Pa. 2018).

Pincite

195 A.3d 168 (Thompson v. Thompson. Pet of: Clarion Dom. Rel.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related