Opinion ID: 3021704
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Robert Cook

Text: In 1988, a Philadelphia jury convicted Cook of first-degree murder. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment and a concurrent term on a weapons offense. After unsuccessfully pursuing an appeal and a Post-Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”) petition, he filed a second PCRA petition in 1997. While this petition was pending, the DAO released the McMahon tape. Counsel filed an untimely amended petition in 1999, which the PCRA court dismissed. An appeal was also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In 2003, Cook filed a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in the District Court alleging a Batson violation. The District Court dismissed the petition holding that it was untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). See Cook v. Beard, No. 03-05324 (E.D. Pa.). 2 A jury also found Cook guilty of a second unrelated murder in 1988, and subsequently sentenced him to death. Again, his conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. He filed for PCRA relief in 1999, raising a Batson claim. The PCRA court found no violation of Batson, but granted him a new sentencing hearing. He was subsequently resentenced to life imprisonment.