section 9 rights in Pennsylvania

2023This “denies the accused the assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, as well as the right to direct appeal under Article V, Section 9[.]” Id.

2018In Commonwealth v. Lantzy, 736 A.2d 564 (Pa. 1999), our Supreme Court explained counsel’s obligations when presented with a request to litigate a direct appeal. [W]here there is an unjustified failure to file a requested direct appeal, the conduct of counsel falls beneath the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases, denies the accused the assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, as well as the right to direct appeal under Article V, Section 9, and constitutes prejudic

2021While a defendant does not have a right to hybrid representation, “there is a right of appeal pursuant to Article 5, § 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.” Williams, 151 A.3d at 624 (citing Commonwealth v. Ellis, 534 Pa. 176 , 626 A.2d 1137 (1993)).

2021While a defendant does not have a right to hybrid representation, “there is a right of appeal pursuant to Article 5, § 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.” Williams, 151 A.3d at 624 (citing Commonwealth v. Ellis, 534 Pa. 176 , 626 A.2d 1137 (1993)).

2021While a defendant does not have a right to hybrid representation, “there is a right of appeal pursuant to Article 5, § 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.” Williams, 151 A.3d at 624 (citing Commonwealth v. Ellis, 534 Pa. 176 , 626 A.2d 1137 (1993)).

2021While a defendant does not have a right to hybrid representation, “there is a right of appeal pursuant to Article 5, § 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.” Williams, 151 A.3d at 624 (citing Commonwealth v. Ellis, 534 Pa. 176 , 626 A.2d 1137 (1993)).

2026See Pa.R.A.P. 2119(a)-(e) (requiring an appellant to discuss each particular point of an argument, cite pertinent authorities, refer to the place in the record where a matter appears, and set forth a synopsis of all evidence related to a point); Commonwealth v. Johnson, 985 A.2d 915, 924 (Pa. 2009) (recognizing a convicted criminal defendant’s right to direct appeal pursuant to Article V, Section 9 of our Constitution, but stating, “where an appellate brief fails to provide any discussion of a claim with citation to relevant authority or fails to develop the issue in any other meaningful fashi

2019Moreover, “while a person convicted of a crime is guaranteed the right to direct appeal under Article V, Section 9, of the Pennsylvania Constitution, where an appellate brief fails to provide any discussion of a claim with citation to relevant authority or fails to develop the issue in any other meaningful fashion capable of review, that claim is waived.” Commonwealth v. Johnson, 985 A.2d 915, 924 (Pa. 2009) (citations omitted).

2023Tellingly, “the right to counsel under Article I, § 9 [of the Pennsylvania Constitution] is coterminous with the Sixth Amendment right for purposes of determining when the right attaches.” Commonwealth v. McCoy, 975 A.2d 586, 590 (Pa. 2009) (citations omitted).

2017Moreover, “the right to counsel under Article I, § 9 [of the Pennsylvania Constitution] is coterminous with the Sixth Amendment right for purposes of. determining when the right attaches.” Commonwealth v. McCoy, 601 Pa. 540 , 975 A.2d 586, 590 (2009) (citations omitted).

2013Commonwealth v. McCoy, 601 Pa. 540 , 975 A.2d 586, 590 (2009); Commonwealth v. Bomar, 573 Pa. 426 , 826 A.2d 831, 844 (2003); Commonwealth v. Arroyo, 555 Pa. 125 , 723 A.2d 162, 170 (1999).

2013Commonwealth v. McCoy, 601 Pa. 540 , 975 A.2d 586, 590 (2009); Commonwealth v. Bomar, 573 Pa. 426 , 826 A.2d 831, 844 (2003); Commonwealth v. Arroyo, 555 Pa. 125 , 723 A.2d 162, 170 (1999).

2014Bomar I, 826 A.2d at 844 .

2014Bomar I, 826 A.2d at 844 .

2018Commonwealth v. Hill, 737 A.2d 255, 258 (Pa. Super. 1999); Commonwealth v. Carter, [] 281 A.2d 75, 80 (Pa. Super. 1971) (adopting the Snyder “fullness of the opportunity” test).

2008Commonwealth v. Hill, 737 A.2d 255, 258 (Pa.Super.1999); Commonwealth v. Carter, 219 Pa.Super. 280 , 281 A.2d 75, 80 (1971) (adopting the Snyder "fullness of the opportunity" test). ¶ 24 This constitutional right to be present is not guaranteed "when presence would be useless, or the benefit but a shadow." Snyder, 291 U.S. at 106-07 , 54 *1282 S.Ct. 330.

2018Commonwealth v. Hill, 737 A.2d 255, 258 (Pa. Super. 1999); Commonwealth v. Carter, [] 281 A.2d 75, 80 (Pa. Super. 1971) (adopting the Snyder “fullness of the opportunity” test).

2008Commonwealth v. Hill, 737 A.2d 255, 258 (Pa.Super.1999); Commonwealth v. Carter, 219 Pa.Super. 280 , 281 A.2d 75, 80 (1971) (adopting the Snyder "fullness of the opportunity" test). ¶ 24 This constitutional right to be present is not guaranteed "when presence would be useless, or the benefit but a shadow." Snyder, 291 U.S. at 106-07 , 54 *1282 S.Ct. 330.

2000See generally Canales v. Roe, 151 F.3d 1226, 1229-30 (9th Cir.1998)(stating that “it appears that every federal court of appeals to address the issue has applied some form of a rule of presumed prejudice where counsel fails to file a notice of appeal”). 7 Thus, we hold that, where there is an unjustified failure to file a requested direct appeal, the conduct of counsel falls beneath the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases, denies the accused the assistance of counsel guaranteed bg the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 9 of the Penn

1999See generally Canales v. Roe, 151 F.3d 1226, 1229-30 (9th Cir.1998)(stating that “[i]t appears that every federal court of appeals to address the issue has applied some form of a rule of *226 presumed prejudice where counsel fails to file a notice of appeal”). 7 Thus, we hold that, where there is an unjustified failure to file a requested direct appeal, 8 the conduct of counsel falls *227 beneath the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases, denies the accused the assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section

1997Commonwealth Court began its analysis by quoting In Re 1983 Audit Report of Beharry, 116 Pa.Cmwlth. 613 , 544 A.2d 514, 517-18 (1988) as follows: It is, of course, well settled that there is a presumption against a statute having retroactive effect and that such construction will not be embraced unless it is clearly and manifestly intended by the legislature.

1997Commonwealth Court began its analysis by quoting In Re 1983 Audit Report of Beharry, 116 Pa.Cmwlth. 613 , 544 A.2d 514, 517-18 (1988) as follows: It is, of course, well settled that there is a presumption against a statute having retroactive effect and that such construction will not be embraced unless it is clearly and manifestly intended by the legislature.

2014Similarly, we have recognized that decisions based on Pennsylvania’s Declaration of Rights “ensure[s] future consistency in state constitutional interpretation, since federal law is always subject to change.” Commonwealth v. Lewis, 528 Pa. 440 , 598 A.2d 975 , 979 n. 8 (1991) (holding that defendant’s rights under Article I, Section 9 were violated by the failure to provide a no-adverse inference instruction).

2014Similarly, we have recognized that decisions based on Pennsylvania’s Declaration of Rights “ensure[s] future consistency in state constitutional interpretation, since federal law is always subject to change.” Commonwealth v. Lewis, 528 Pa. 440 , 598 A.2d 975 , 979 n. 8 (1991) (holding that defendant’s rights under Article I, Section 9 were violated by the failure to provide a no-adverse inference instruction).

2007Id.

2007Id. at 320-21, 916 A.2d at 629 (citations omitted).

2025See id. at 12 (stating that “[Appellant] does not argue that his sentence is illegal under Apprendi [v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000)].”).1 Appellant rests his complaints about the Commonwealth on Section 1102(c) of our Crimes Code, which provides, in relevant part, that a person who has been convicted of attempt . . . to commit murder . . . where serious bodily injury results may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment which shall be fixed by the court at not more ____________________________________________ 1 However, Appellant does argue that the “[c]ourt’s sua sponte inclusion of a senten

2025Baker, 311 A.3d at 18.

2024See Ocasio, 574 A.2d at 1167 .

2022See also Commonwealth v. Fischere, 70 A.3d 1270, 1276 (Pa.Super. 2013) (“our Supreme Court has held ‘there is no Fifth Amendment proscription precluding the raising of silence in fair response to defense argumentation.’) (citing Commonwealth v. DiNicola, 866 A.2d 329, 335 (Pa. 2005)); Adams, supra (holding prosecutor’s remarks about defendant’s pre-arrest silence were fair response to defense commentary and therefore did not violate right to silence under Article I Section 9). - 11 - In the case sub judice, both the prosecutor’s question put to Mr. Traver and his subsequent clarification of Mr

2022See also Commonwealth v. Fischere, 70 A.3d 1270, 1276 (Pa.Super. 2013) (“our Supreme Court has held ‘there is no Fifth Amendment proscription precluding the raising of silence in fair response to defense argumentation.’) (citing Commonwealth v. DiNicola, 866 A.2d 329, 335 (Pa. 2005)); Adams, supra (holding prosecutor’s remarks about defendant’s pre-arrest silence were fair response to defense commentary and therefore did not violate right to silence under Article I Section 9). - 11 - In the case sub judice, both the prosecutor’s question put to Mr. Traver and his subsequent clarification of Mr

2021See Commonwealth v. Maldonodo, 173 A.3d 769, 783 (Pa. Super. 2017) (Commonwealth not required to aid defense counsel’s investigation or sift through evidence on defendant’s behalf). 18 defense would facially and substantially deny his constitutional rights under Article I, Section 9.

2019See Roane, supra. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held: [W]hile a person convicted of a crime is guaranteed the right to direct appeal under Article V, Section 9, of the Pennsylvania Constitution, where an appellate brief fails to provide any discussion of a claim with citation to relevant authority or fails to develop the issue in any other meaningful fashion capable of review, that claim is waived.

2019However, the court's reasoning does "not already appear of record," and the court failed to "specify in writing the place in the record where [the] reasons [for the order or the rulings or other errors complained of] may be found." Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a)(1). 4 See also Commonwealth v. Johnson, 828 A.2d 1009, 1015 (Pa. 2003) (stating right to counsel under Article I, § 9 of Pennsylvania Constitution is coterminous with Sixth Amendment for determining when right attaches). -5 J -S62029-18 Rule 121 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure outlines the information the court must elicit from the

2019See also Pa.R.A.P. 2101 (“Briefs and reproduced records shall conform in all material respects with the requirements of these rules as nearly as the circumstances of the particular case will admit, otherwise they may be suppressed, and, if the defects are in the brief or reproduced record of the appellant and are substantial, the appeal or other matter may be quashed or dismissed.”); see also Commonwealth v. Franklin, 823 A.2d 906, 910 (Pa. Super. 2003) (“These rules ensure that a brief serves its purpose-to permit the appellate court to address the assignments on their merits.”) (footnote omi