Opinion

Commonwealth v. Brunner

  • 502 Pa. 358
  • 466 A.2d 991
  • 1983 Pa. LEXIS 837
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Jul 22, 1983
Status
Published
Author
Hutchinson
On the bench
Files, Hutchinson
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 7.2%

The opinion

HUTCHINSON, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent. The initial factor which must be considered in determining whether there are reasonable grounds for counsel’s actions is whether the claim is of arguable merit. Commonwealth v. Hubbard, 472 Pa. 259 , 372 A.2d 687 (1977). I fail to see how the witness’s reference in this case to a co-defendant’s prior unrelated criminal conduct so prejudices petitioner as to require a new trial. Since petitioner has failed to provide an adequate basis to establish that a motion for a mistrial would have arguable merit, I would not remand for an inquiry into trial counsel’s decision not to pursue the matter. See Commonwealth v. Hubbard, supra.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.