Rights to Speedy Trial Violated

[King Henery IV]

My question involves civil rights in the State of: Pennsylvania

I was arrested on 10/13/2010 after 6 months incarceration I petitioned the court for nominal bail , I was granted bail with condition of house arrest . Somewhere in the middle against my advice counsel asked for a continuance .This Stopped the clock on a "Pa.R.Crim.P 600" right to trial within 365 days . It has since been scheduled for a date certain on 6/6/12 this date falls (12) days short of a rule 600 violation . Now I receive notice from court " Trial date was removed at the request of the Commonwealth " and will be rescheduled by the court . This is clear to me a attempt to circumvent a rule 600 violation . My question is is there a legal difference between " removed at the request of the Commonwealth" and a continuance ?

[flyingron]

There's no difference between removed at the request and a continuance as far as rule 600 goes. You do have to make sure that the clock is indeed running AFTER your lawyer's requested continuance.