Martin v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Decided 2003-12-30

Cited by 237 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Justice NIGRO, Dissenting. I must respectfully dissent as I believe that the Commonwealth Court properly affirmed the decision of the Board of Probation and Parole (“Board”) not to credit Appellant James Martin’s pre-trial confinement to his parole violation sentence, i.e., his “original sentence.” I would reaffirm the rule set forth by this Court over a decade ago in Gaito v. P…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.