Case Name: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Howard William DEWEESE, Petitioner
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2017-11-07
Citations: 174 A.3d 562
Docket Number: No. 387 MAL 2017
Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Howard William DEWEESE, Petitioner
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 174
Pages: 562–562

Head Matter:
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Howard William DEWEESE, Petitioner
No. 387 MAL 2017
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
November 7, 2017

Opinion:
AMENDED ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 7th day of November, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:
Did the Superior Court err in denying PCRA relief where [Petitioner's] trial counsel failed to preserve for direct appeal the testimony of 14 witnesses who were prevented by the trial court from offering exculpatory testimony that was crucial to the .defense .and that would have directly- contradicted the Commonwealth's primary witnesses at trial?