172 A.3d 1117
Decided October 17, 2017
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2017-10-17
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 2018
1 state decisions
Key passage — most relied on by later courts
“Whether the Superior Court erred in reversing the PCRA court's grant of a new trial based on after-discovered evidence by finding that Tyson's testimony was merely cumulative and corroborative of the exculpatory evidence presented at [appellant]'s trial?”
quoted by 1 later decision, including Commonwealth v. Small, E., Aplt.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2017-10-17
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1 ORDER
¶2 AND NOW, this 17th day of October, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:
Whether the Superior Court erred in reversing the PCRA court’s grant of a new trial based on after-discovered evidence by finding that Tyson’s testimony was merely cumulative and corroborative of the exculpatory evidence presented at Petitioner’s trial?