Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544 (2026)

Previous litigation and waiver.

✓ current as of May 2026

Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 9544. Previous litigation and waiver.

(a) Previous litigation.--For purposes of this subchapter, an issue has been previously litigated if:

(1) (Deleted by amendment).

(2) the highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a matter of right has ruled on the merits of the issue; or

(3) it has been raised and decided in a proceeding collaterally attacking the conviction or sentence.

(b) Issues waived.--For purposes of this subchapter, an issue is waived if the petitioner could have raised it but failed to do so before trial, at trial, during unitary review, on appeal or in a prior state postconviction proceeding.

(Apr. 13, 1988, P.L.336, No.47, eff. imd.; Nov. 17, 1995, 1st Sp.Sess., P.L.1118, No.32, eff. 60 days)

Suspension by Court Order. Subsec. (b) was suspended August 11, 1997, S.Ct. Order, insofar as it references "unitary review."

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 697 cases (151 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Smith, 17 A.3d 873 (Pa. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Smith, 17 A.3d 873 (Pa. 2011). · cites it 20× “A claim is previously litigated if "it has been raised in the trial court, the trial court has ruled on the merits of the issue and the petitioner did not appeal," see 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(1), or "the highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a…”

Commonwealth v. Rainey, 928 A.2d 215 (Pa. 2007). · cites it 14× “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(b) (1995). Further, the relaxed waiver rule is no longer applicable to PCRA appeals pursuant to Commonwealth v.”

Commonwealth v. Treiber, S., Aplt, 121 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2015). · cites it 10× “See Treiber, at 32 (trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s request to represent himself); see also 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(2). Insofar as appellant alleges counsel failed to thoroughly advocate for his right to represent himself, his cursory claim of…”

Commonwealth v. Grant, 813 A.2d 726 (Pa. 2002). · cites it 8× “It seems anomalous that where the issues involve claims of ineffectiveness, we employ the exact opposite appellate review process that we require in almost all other appeals.”

Commonwealth v. Brown, 872 A.2d 1139 (Pa. 2005). · cites it 14× “A claim is previously litigated under the PCRA if the highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a matter of right has ruled on the merits of the issue.”

Commonwealth v. Spotz, 896 A.2d 1191 (Pa. 2006). · cites it 10× “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(2)-(3). We have never ruled on the issue of whether Spotz's Clearfield and Schuylkill County crimes were part of the same criminal episode.”

Commonwealth v. Ligons, 971 A.2d 1125 (Pa. 2009). · cites it 12× “42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(b). Further, it was not raised in Appellant's PCRA petition, but was presented to the PCRA court after the request for a new trial was denied and a new penalty hearing was granted.”

Commonwealth v. Collins, 888 A.2d 564 (Pa. 2005). · cites it 10× “ For purposes of this subchapter, an issue has been previously litigated if: *570 * * * * * * (2) the highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a matter of right has ruled on the merits of the issue; 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(2). [4] From these…”

Commonwealth v. Bracey, 795 A.2d 935 (Pa. 2001). · cites it 10× “2d 517, 526 (2001) ("[T]hose claims that were not raised at the earliest opportunity (on direct appeal) would be deemed waived" under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544); id. at 534 (Castille, J.”

Commonwealth v. Tedford, 960 A.2d 1 (Pa. 2008). · cites it 8× “Under the pre-amendment version of the PCRA, an issue has been previously litigated if: (1) it has been raised in the trial court, the trial court has ruled on the merits of the issue and the petitioner did not appeal; (2) the highest appellate court in which the petitioner…”

Commonwealth v. Hannibal, S., Aplt., 156 A.3d 197 (Pa. 2016). · cites it 8× “” 2 See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a) (“For purposes of this subchapter, an issue has been previously litigated if .”

Commonwealth v. Williams, 980 A.2d 510 (Pa. 2009). · cites it 12× “In order to determine whether there is arguable merit to the claim of appellate counsel ineffectiveness, we examine the substance of the underlying claim.”

Show all 697 citing cases →

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(1) — 1 case

Thomas v. Beard, 388 F. Supp. 2d 489 (E.D. Pa. 2005).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(2) — 1 case

Commonwealth v. Abu-Jamal, 720 A.2d 79 (Pa. 1998).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(B) — 1 case

Com. v. Brown, W. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(a) — 52 cases

Commonwealth v. D'Amato, 856 A.2d 806 (Pa. 2004).

Commonwealth v. Gibson, 951 A.2d 1110 (Pa. 2008).

Commonwealth v. Lesko, 15 A.3d 345 (Pa. 2011).

Commonwealth v. Lawson, 549 A.2d 107 (Pa. 1988).

Commonwealth v. Hannibal, S., Aplt., 156 A.3d 197 (Pa. 2016). “” 2 See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a) (“For purposes of this subchapter, an issue has been previously litigated if .”

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(a)(1) — 5 cases

Commonwealth v. Tedford, 960 A.2d 1 (Pa. 2008). “Under the pre-amendment version of the PCRA, an issue has been previously litigated if: (1) it has been raised in the trial court, the trial court has ruled on the merits of the issue and the petitioner did not appeal; (2) the highest appellate court in which the petitioner…”

Commonwealth v. Smith, 17 A.3d 873 (Pa. 2011). “A claim is previously litigated if "it has been raised in the trial court, the trial court has ruled on the merits of the issue and the petitioner did not appeal," see 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(1), or "the highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a…”

Commonwealth v. Allen, 732 A.2d 582 (Pa. 1999).

Thomas v. Beard, 388 F. Supp. 2d 489 (E.D. Pa. 2005).

Commonwealth v. Williams, 567 A.2d 709 (Pa. 1989).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(a)(2) — 191 cases

Commonwealth v. Collins, 888 A.2d 564 (Pa. 2005). “ For purposes of this subchapter, an issue has been previously litigated if: *570 * * * * * * (2) the highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a matter of right has ruled on the merits of the issue; 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(2). [4] From these…”

Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795 (Pa. 2014).

Commonwealth v. Hannibal, S., Aplt., 156 A.3d 197 (Pa. 2016). “” 2 See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a) (“For purposes of this subchapter, an issue has been previously litigated if .”

Commonwealth v. Reyes, 870 A.2d 888 (Pa. 2005).

Commonwealth v. Cousar, B., Aplt., 154 A.3d 287 (Pa. 2017).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(a)(2)(3) — 2 cases

Commonwealth v. Cox, 983 A.2d 666 (Pa. 2009).

Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 986 A.2d 759 (Pa. 2009).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(a)(3) — 33 cases

Commonwealth v. Chmiel, D., Aplt., 173 A.3d 617 (Pa. 2017).

Commonwealth v. Watts, 23 A.3d 980 (Pa. 2011).

Commonwealth v. Lambert, 884 A.2d 848 (Pa. 2005).

Commonwealth v. Lesko, 501 A.2d 200 (Pa. 1985).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(b) — 490 cases

Commonwealth v. Rainey, 928 A.2d 215 (Pa. 2007). “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(b) (1995). Further, the relaxed waiver rule is no longer applicable to PCRA appeals pursuant to Commonwealth v.”

Commonwealth v. Grant, 813 A.2d 726 (Pa. 2002). “It seems anomalous that where the issues involve claims of ineffectiveness, we employ the exact opposite appellate review process that we require in almost all other appeals.”

Commonwealth v. Ligons, 971 A.2d 1125 (Pa. 2009). “42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(b). Further, it was not raised in Appellant's PCRA petition, but was presented to the PCRA court after the request for a new trial was denied and a new penalty hearing was granted.”

Commonwealth v. Treiber, S., Aplt, 121 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2015). “See Treiber, at 32 (trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s request to represent himself); see also 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(2). Insofar as appellant alleges counsel failed to thoroughly advocate for his right to represent himself, his cursory claim of…”

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(b)(1)(iii) — 8 cases

Com. v. Johnson, A. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).

Com. v. Floyd, T. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).

Com. v. Jackson, D. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).

Com. v. Rios, E. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).

Com. v. Martinez, O. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(b)(2) — 1 case

Commonwealth v. Lesko, 501 A.2d 200 (Pa. 1985).

— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9544(c) — 6 cases

Commonwealth v. Lawson, 549 A.2d 107 (Pa. 1988).

Commonwealth v. Anthony, 475 A.2d 1303 (Pa. 1984).

Commonwealth v. Rawls, 477 A.2d 540 (Pa. 1984).

Com. v. Warden, R. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).

Com. v. Cucurullo Taveras, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.