Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 21, 2007

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2007-12-21

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently December 2009

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[T]he matter is REMANDED for the Superior Court to address Petitioner’s argument that the sentence imposed by the trial court violated his Fifth Amendment rights under Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 1866 , 68 L.Ed.2d 359 (1981), and Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314 , 119 S.Ct. 1307 , 143 L.Ed.2d 424 (1999).”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 2009 Pa. Super. 94 - Commonwealth v. Bowen

Relies on Estelle v. Smith · Mitchell v. United States · Com. v. Olmeda-Rivera

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-12-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2 AND NOW, this 21st day of December, 2007, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED, the Order of the Superior Court is VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED for the Superior Court to address Petitioner’s argument that the sentence imposed by the trial court violated his Fifth Amendment rights under Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454, 101 S.Ct. 1866, 68 L.Ed.2d 359 (1981), and Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314, 119 S.Ct. 1307, 143 L.Ed.2d 424 (1999). See Commonwealth v. Olmeda-Rivera, 927 A.2d 656 *406 (Pa.Super.2007) Middle District Appeal 2006 (Pa.Super.), Brief of Appellant at 14-16, 22.

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.