Com. v. Phillips (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S73041-12 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. JOSEPH PHILLIPS, Appellant No. 854 WDA 2012 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of May 9, 2012 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-02-SA-0000361-2012 BEFORE: SHOGAN, OTT and COLVILLE*, JJ. MEMORANDUM BY COLVILLE, J.: Filed: February 19, 2013 This is a pro se appeal from the judgment of sentence imposed following Appellant s convictions of Driving while operating privilege is suspended or revoked and Obedience to traffic-control devices. Appellant specifies no issue for our review. Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 2101 dictates that appellate briefs must conform, in all material respects, to the requirements of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Pa.R.A.P. 2101. This rule also states that if the defects are in the brief or reproduced record of the appellant and are substantial, the appeal or other matter may be quashed or dismissed. Id. Appellant s pro se appellate brief does not conform to the Rules of Appellate ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S73041-12 Procedure in any meaningful way. The defects in Appellant s brief are substantial; consequently, we exercise our discretion to dismiss the appeal. Appeal dismissed. Judge Shogan files a Dissenting Memorandum. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
