Opinion

Commonwealth v. Stanton

  • 239 Pa. Super. 47
  • 362 A.2d 355
  • 1976 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1927
Court
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Mar 29, 1976
Status
Published
Author
Spaeth
On the bench
Cercone, Hoffman, Jacobs, Price, Spaeth, Voort, Watkins
Cited by
7 cases

Reversed on other grounds by Commonwealth v. Stanton, 479 Pa. 521 (1978)

allocatur granted July 13, 1976

How later courts described this case

  • allocatur granted July 13, 1976

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Dissenting Opinion by

Spaeth, J.:

I join Judge Hoffman’s dissenting opinion, that *66 appellant Howell should be awarded a new trial. I would also award a new trial to appellant Hinkley.

Granted that the doctrine of fundamental error is no more. Still, when two defendants are tried together; when the same error is made as to both defendants; when the attorney for each defendant is- incompetent and therefore fails to protect the record; and when on appeal the new attorney for one defendant points out the error, and accordingly wins a new trial for his client; in these circumstances I think it does no great violence to Clair or Dancer to award the other defendant a new trial too. He will get it as soon as he gets competent counsel, in a PCHA hearing. I would give it to him now.

Hoffman, J., joins in this opinion.

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.