Case ID: a3d_134/html/0446-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. Shawn Lamar BURTON, Respondent.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    April 6, 2016.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 6th day of April, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue is:

Does Superior Court’s published en banc decision contravene established precedent in concluding a hearing was necessary to determine whether [Respondent acted with due diligence in invoking the after-discovered facts exception to [the] time bar by (1) creating an exception for pro se petitioners to the long-standing rule presuming that publicly available information cannot be deemed unknown for purposes of 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 9545(b)(l)(ii) where a petition has been filed beyond 60 days of the date the information entered the public domain, and by (2) shifting the burden of pleading and proof to the Commonwealth under such circumstances?

Justice DONOHUE did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.