Commonwealth v. Renchenski, 6 A.3d 1287 (Pa. 2010). · Go Syfert
Search
Commonwealth v. Renchenski, 6 A.3d 1287 (Pa. 2010). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Commonwealth v. Markowitz (pasuperct, 2011-08-29)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Commonwealth v. Markowitz (2×)
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Commonwealth v. Renchenski, 988 A.2d 699, 703 (Pa.Super.2010) allowance of appeal granted, 607 Pa. 371 , 6 A.3d 1287 (2010), (finding purpose of § 9543(b) was to “ensure that the Commonwealth is not prejudiced by a defendant’s delay in pursuing his post-conviction rights.”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent
v.
Charles S. RENCHENSKI, Petitioner
4 WAL 2010.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Oct 25, 2010.
6 A.3d 1287
Per Curiam.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 25th day of October, 2010, the Application for Leave to File Supplement to Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED. The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, limited to the following issues:

1. Whether the Superior Court erred in concluding that 42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(b) of the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) applies to delay in litigating a pending PCRA petition?
2. What obligation, if any, does a petitioner have to seek expeditious litigation of his PCRA petition?

The trial court is directed to appoint counsel to assist Petitioner with this appeal.