Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Daniel Richard Hurley, Gx-2685 v. William Schouppe

July 31, 2012

DANIEL RICHARD HURLEY, GX-2685, PETITIONER,
v.
WILLIAM SCHOUPPE, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mitchell, M.J.:

MEMORANDUM and ORDER

Daniel Richard Hurley has presented a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. For the reasons set forth below, the petition will be dismissed and because reasonable jurists could not conclude that a basis for appeal exists, a certificate of appealability will be denied.

Hurley is presently serving a sixteen to thirty-two year sentence imposed following his conviction, by a jury, of criminal attempt -- murder, aggravated assault, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and former convict not to possess a firearm. This sentence was imposed on December 12, 2006 at No. CC 200516287 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.*fn1

An appeal was taken to the Superior Court in which an Anders*fn2 brief was filed raising as the sole issue:

Should this Honorable Court grant counsel's motion to withdraw and after a full review of the record confirm finding that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal.

Additionally counsel argued:

1. The verdict in this matter was against the weight of evidence.

2. The trial court erred when it overruled the defendant's objection relevant to admission of certain evidence.

3. The evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction for prior convict not to carry.*fn3

On July 16, 2008, the judgment was affirmed and counsel was granted leave to withdraw.

Hurley subsequently filed a post-conviction petition which was denied on December 7, 2009.*fn4 An appeal was taken to the Superior Court in which the issues presented were:

1. Whether Attorney Coffey was ineffective and his Turner/Finley motion/letter insufficient where he determined defendant's second claim (regarding trial counsel's failure to present evidence) was meritless because "[t]he instant claim alleges insufficient facts to demonstrat[]e ineffectiveness?

2. Whether Attorney Coffey was ineffective for not preserving the claim that trial counsel was ineffective for not adequately discussing the advantages and disadvantages of accepting or rejecting any of the various plea offers made in this case?

3. Whether the Court of Common Pleas erred and/or abused its discretion in failing to conduct the required independent review of the record where said Court overlooked/ignored said defect in Attorney Coffey's Turner/Finley motion/letter?*fn5

On December 14, 2010 the denial of post-conviction relief was affirmed.*fn6 Leave to appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was denied on May 5, 2011.*fn7

On April 12, 2012, Hurley executed the instant petition in which he contends he is entitled to relief on the following grounds:

1. Trial counsel failed to object to prosecutorial misconduct during his closing argument that misled ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.