Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2003 Pa. Super. 495

840 A.2d 326

Commonwealth v. Gonzalez

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 18, 2003

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2003-12-18

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 2004

4 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2003-12-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DEL SOLE, P.J.,

¶1Concurring:

¶2¶ 1 I join the Majority Opinion but write separately only to express my desire that the Criminal Rules Committee revisit Pa. R.Crim.P. 576(C). Rule 576(C) does not permit the clerk of courts to docket or record any filings submitted by a defendant who is represented by an attorney. In such an instance the Rule directs the clerk of courts to forward the document to the defendant’s attorney within 10 days of receipt. Because of the time sensitive nature of some filings, in particular a notice of appeal, I am troubled by the effect the Rule may have on a defendant who seeks to timely perfect an appeal with a pro se filing.

¶3¶2 To protect a defendant’s efforts to file a timely notice of appeal or other time sensitive document, I suggest the Rule provide that, where a defendant submits for filing a document which is not signed by the attorney of record, the receipt of the item be marked on the docket before the document is forwarded to counsel. Notice of its mailing to counsel should also be noted on the docket. Such action will protect a defendant from having an appeal or motion dismissed as untimely where it is clear that the defendant sought to act in a timely fashion as evidenced by the timely pro se filing with the clerk of courts. It will also confirm that the attorney of record was notified when a defendant takes such action.

/2003/pasuper/495 · .json · Public domain