From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Com. v. Daniels

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Sep 22, 1980
420 A.2d 1323 (Pa. 1980)

Summary

In Daniels, in a per curiam opinion, we ordered the petitioner's court appointed counsel to file a PAA, despite counsel's refusal to do so.

Summary of this case from Com. v. Ratsamy

Opinion

September 22, 1980.

Appeal from the Superior Court, Montgomery County, No. 755, October Term, 1979.

Before EAGEN, C. J., and O'BRIEN, ROBERTS, NIX, LARSEN, FLAHERTY and KAUFFMAN, JJ.


OPINION OF THE COURT


Pro se petitioner Willis Daniels seeks allowance of appeal from an order of the Superior Court affirming judgment of sentence on convictions of robbery and related offenses. Without considering whether to grant allowance of appeal, we direct the Public Defender of Montgomery County who represented petitioner on his direct appeal to the Superior Court to continue representation of petitioner and thus to file a proper petition for allowance of appeal.

Here petitioner proceeds pro se on allowance of appeal only because the Public Defender appointed to assist petitioner on direct appeal believes petitioner is not entitled to further assistance of counsel. In a letter dated August 1, 1980 addressed to this Court's Prothonotary, the Assistant District Attorney of Montgomery County expressly states that he

"[c]oncur[s] with [the Public Defender's] assessment that an indigent prisoner does not have a right to the appointment of counsel for preparing appellate papers after all his direct rights of appeal have been exhausted."

We are unable to understand the basis for the Public Defender's (and, for that matter, the Assistant District Attorney's) position. Pa.R.Crim.Proc. 316(cXiii) provides:

"Where counsel has been assigned, such assignment shall be effective until final judgment, including any proceedings upon direct appeal."

By this Rule this Court long has guaranteed that a person seeking allowance of appeal is entitled to the assistance of counsel. See e. g., Commonwealth v. Stancell, 435 Pa. 301, 256 A.2d 798 (1969); Commonwealth v. Hickox, 433 Pa. 144, 249 A.2d 777 (1969). See also Pa.R.Crim.Proc. 1503(a) e. g., Commonwealth v. Patterson, 470 Pa. 618, 369 A.2d 1163 (1977) (post-conviction petitioner entitled to counsel); Post Conviction Hearing Act, Act of January 25, 1966, P.L. (1965) 1580, § 4(a)(2), 19 P. S. § 1180-4(a)(2) (Supp. 1979). In harmony with our Rule and prior case law, we direct the Public Defender to file a proper petition, within thirty days.

Public Defender directed to file proper petition for allowance of appeal within thirty days.


Summaries of

Com. v. Daniels

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Sep 22, 1980
420 A.2d 1323 (Pa. 1980)

In Daniels, in a per curiam opinion, we ordered the petitioner's court appointed counsel to file a PAA, despite counsel's refusal to do so.

Summary of this case from Com. v. Ratsamy

In Commonwealth v. Daniels, 491 Pa. 289, 420 A.2d 1323 (1980) our Supreme Court was faced with a somewhat identical factual situation, the only real difference being appellant's intervening PCHA petitions; in Daniels the appellant raised his claim immediately after counsel refused to seek review in the Supreme Court.

Summary of this case from Com. v. Clarke
Case details for

Com. v. Daniels

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Willis DANIELS, Petitioner

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Sep 22, 1980

Citations

420 A.2d 1323 (Pa. 1980)
420 A.2d 1323

Citing Cases

Com. v. Ratsamy

Pa.R.Crim.P. 122(B)(3) (emphasis added). Relying on this rule and our per curiam opinion in Commonwealth v.…

Com. v. West

Where counsel has been assigned, such assignment shall be effective until final judgment, including any…