Commonwealth v. McGee, R. - No. (Granted) (petitions for allowance of appeal)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent v. RODNEY STERLING MCGEE, Petitioner : No. 297 WAL 2021 : : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Superior Court : : : : : : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 12th day of April, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is: Does the Superior Court’s continued application herein and elsewhere of its holding in Commonwealth v. Jackson, 30 A.3d 516 (Pa. Super. 2011), that a trial court’s inherent jurisdiction to correct patent and obvious mistakes in its records and orders is subject to the time-bar provisions of the PCRA improperly constrict trial courts’ jurisdiction, improperly expand the scope of the time-bar, and/or conflict with this Honorable Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Holmes, 933 A.2d 57 (Pa. 2007), which recognized that claims invoking said jurisdiction are not cognizable under the PCRA and thus not subject to the time-bar?
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.
