Smith v. Board of Probation & Parole

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Decided 1990-04-25

Cited by 126 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

ZAPPALA, Justice, dissenting. I must dissent from the majority’s affirmance of the order of the Commonwealth Court assessing attorney’s fees and costs against court appointed counsel in these cases. The majority holds that despite the constitutional right to counsel in an appeal from a parole revocation, such an assessment may be made against court appointed appellate counsel for the filing of a frivolous appea…

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.