Court Opinion

ID: 9554147
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 20:11:05.073354+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:33:09.858458
License: Public Domain

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
                                MIDDLE DISTRICT

 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,                    : No. 88 MAL 2023
                                                  :
                     Respondent                   :
                                                  : Petition for Allowance of Appeal
                                                  : from the Order of the Superior Court
               v.                                 :
                                                  :
                                                  :
 LAMARCUS EUGENE DRAYTON,                         :
                                                  :
                     Petitioner                   :

                                          ORDER

PER CURIAM

      AND NOW, this 7th day of August, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to the

remaining issue. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

      Did the court err and abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s PCRA
      [petition] given trial counsel’s ineffectiveness for failing to object to written
      jury instructions being sent back with the jury during deliberations by
      requiring a show of prejudice which would in essence require the jurors to
      be polled on how [they] viewed the jury instructions?