# Commonwealth v. Banks

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · March 27, 1995 · 540 Pa. 143

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9636499

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. George BANKS, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** March 27, 1995
- **Citations:** 540 Pa. 143; 656 A.2d 467; 1995 Pa. LEXIS 197
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Nix
- **Judges:** Nix, C.J., and Flaherty, Zappala, Cappy, Castille and Montemuro
- **Cited by:** 61 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9636499

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that, “[t]o be eligible for PCRA relief, [an a]pellant must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his conviction or sentence resulted from one or more of the enumerated errors or defects found in section 9543(a)(2)[,] and that his issues have not been pre…
- stating in a PCRA appeal that although one of the appellant’s issues had "been finally litigated and Appellant [was] not entitled to PCRA relief thereon,” the court would, "given the serious nature of the matters before [it], [] proceed lo address Appellant’s claim.”
- stating that an issue is previously litigated 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”
- noting that where there are no disputed factual issues, a PCRA hearing is not necessary
- affirming denial of post-conviction relief

## Opinion text

NIX, Chief Justice,
concurring.
On direct appeal, I dissented on the basis that the trial judge failed to ensure that Banks made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel by permitting him to introduce prejudicially inflammatory pictures. I continue to adhere to this view; however, I am constrained to recognize that this issue has been finally litigated and is not subject to collateral attack in its present posture. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(2).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9636499. Public record. Not legal advice.