Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

In re Investigating Grand Jury (Stretton)

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
887 A.2d 257 (2005)


Facts

“Mr. Y” (defendant) privately retained attorney Samuel Stretton in a criminal matter in which “Mr. Y” was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, rape, and robbery and sentenced to death. “Mr. Y” appealed his conviction in February 1983. In April 1983, Stretton filed a motion to withdraw as counsel. The motion was granted in May 1983, and the office of the public defender was appointed to represent “Mr. Y” on his appeal. During the appeal, “Mr. Y” pursued an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim against Stretton. In September 2003, “Mr. Y’s” sentence was vacated because of advances in DNA testing. After “Mr. Y” was released, the state re-investigated the charges against “Mr. Y,” because the state believed “Mr. Y” made incriminating statements to Stretton in a phone call from prison after Stretton withdrew as “Mr. Y’s” counsel. “Mr. Y” called to express his anger with Stretton’s representation and the result of the case. On the call, Stretton did not tell “Mr. Y” whether the conversation would be privileged. It was not clear whether “Mr. Y” had communicated yet with his new attorney when he reached out to Stretton. The state subpoenaed Stretton to testify before the grand jury. Stretton asserted the attorney-client privilege and refused to testify. The court found him in contempt and fined him $100 per day. Stretton appealed the order of contempt.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Klein, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 222,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.