Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

607 Pa. 618

9 A.3d 1133

Commonwealth v. Abraham

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 30, 2010

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2010-11-30

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2012

4 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“whether in light of Padilla ... the distinction in Pennsylvania between direct and collateral consequences to define the scope of constitutionally ‘reasonable professional assistance’ required under Strickland ... is appropriate?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 2011 Pa. Super. 124 - Commonwealth v. Garcia

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Padilla v. Kentucky

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2010-11-30

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2 AND NOW, this 30th day of November 2010, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, rephrased for clarity, are:

¶3 (1) Whether, in light of Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), the distinction in Pennsylvania between direct and collateral consequences to define the scope of constitutionally “reasonable professional assistance” required under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) is appropriate?

¶4 *619 (2) If so, whether the forfeiture of a pension that stems from a public school teacher’s negotiated plea to crimes committed in the scope of his employment is a collateral consequence of a criminal conviction which relieves counsel from any affirmative duty to investigate and advise?

Justice ORIE MELVIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
/607/pa/618 · .json · Public domain