From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Com v. Red

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District
Nov 13, 2007
594 Pa. 466 (Pa. 2007)

Opinion

No. 115 EAL 2007.

November 13, 2007.

Petition for Allowance of Appeal No. 115 EAL 2007 from the Order of the Superior Court at 953 EDA 2005, dated February 13, 2007, vacating and remanding the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County at CP-51-CR-0301931-2003, dated March 23, 2005.

Prior Report: Pa.Super., 918 A.2d 790.


ORDER


AND NOW, this 13th day of November, 2007, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED. The Superior Court did not fully address the Commonwealth's contention that Respondent was represented by counsel during the waiver colloquy and, thus, did not sufficiently preserve by objection the contention that the colloquy was constitutionally inadequate. See Commonwealth's Letter Brief at 6-7. The decision in Commonwealth v. Monica, 528 Pa. 266, 597 A.2d 600, 603 (1991), referred to by the Superior Court, is distinguishable, because in that case there was no dispute that Appellant acted pro se throughout his trial proceeding. The Order of the Superior Court is thus VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED for reconsideration of this argument.


Summaries of

Com v. Red

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District
Nov 13, 2007
594 Pa. 466 (Pa. 2007)
Case details for

Com v. Red

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. John RED a/k/a Fred Fulton…

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District

Date published: Nov 13, 2007

Citations

594 Pa. 466 (Pa. 2007)
937 A.2d 383

Citing Cases

McLaughlin v. Dist. Attorney Phila.

Although Pennsylvania does recognize an exception for pro se litigants, this exception only applies to…

Com. v. Beaver

The Order of the Superior Court is thus VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED for reconsideration of this…