No. 22-5924

Carl Jones v. Pennsylvania

Lower Court: Pennsylvania
Docketed: 2022-10-27
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-procedure appellate-review constitutional-law constitutional-review criminal-procedure due-process evidentiary-standard legal-sufficiency self-defense standard-of-review sufficiency-of-evidence
Key Terms:
Privacy
Latest Conference: 2022-11-18
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the well-settled standard and scope of review governing claims a standard and scope of constitutional dimension prohibit an appellate court from considering surveillance video proffered by the Commonwealth that was published to the fact-finder at trial, but never actually admitted into the evidentiary record, in determining whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support the verdict?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

question presented. i

Docket Entries

2022-11-21
Petition DENIED.
2022-11-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/18/2022.
2022-10-31
Waiver of right of respondent Commonwealth v. Jones to respond filed.
2022-10-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 28, 2022)

Attorneys

Carl Jones
Carl S. Jones Jr. — Petitioner
Carl S. Jones Jr. — Petitioner
Commonwealth v. Jones
Karen T. EdwardsOffice of the District Attorney, Respondent
Karen T. EdwardsOffice of the District Attorney, Respondent