Commonwealth v. Stone
Commonwealth v. Stone, Petitioner
Opinion
Opinion Per Curiam, Petitioner’s counsel in the Superior Court filed no brief and has filed an inadequate petition for allowance of appeal with this Court. This is not the “representation in the role of an advocate” which we require. See Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674, 675 , 78 *498 S. Ct. 974, 2 L. Ed. 2d 1060 (1958);
Commonwealth v. Stein, 436 Pa. 330 , 260 A. 2d 467 (1969). Accordingly, the petition for allocatur is granted, the order of the Superior Court is vacated and the case remanded so that the Superior Court may consider the appeal upon the filing of a brief properly prepared by counsel.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.