No. 18-5420
Tyler T. Heagy v. Pennsylvania
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: appeal-rights constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process filing-restrictions habeas-corpus post-conviction-relief procedural-due-process right-to-appeal right-to-counsel standing statutory-interpretation unconstitutional-as-applied
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-01-18
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Was 42 Pa.C.S.A. §9543 (a)(1)(i) unconstitutional as applied to Petitioners case?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Was 42 Pa.C.S.A. §9543 (a)(1)(i) unconstitutional as applied to Petitioners case? 2. Were 42 Pa.C.S.A. §9545 (b) and (c) unconstitutional as applied to Petitioners case? . 3. The Petitioner has a Constitutional Right to have the Assistance of Counsel and an absolute Right to Appeal. The Petitioners Constitutional Rights have been thwarted by the filing restrictions of the Pennsylvania Post-Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S. §9541 et seq. unconstitutional as applied to Petitioners case? i ;
Docket Entries
2019-01-22
Rehearing DENIED.
2019-01-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/18/2019.
2018-11-02
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2018-10-09
Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2018-09-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-07-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 30, 2018)
Attorneys
Tyler Heagy
Tyler T. Heagy — Petitioner