green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
18.7 score
“nothing in the rule precludes the supplementation of the oral colloquy by a written colloquy that is read, completed, and signed by the defendant and made a part of the plea proceedings.”
Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2009
2017
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 22 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Garcia
nothing in the rule precludes the supplementation of the oral colloquy by a written colloquy that is read, completed, and signed by the defendant and made a part of the plea proceedings.
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Rockel, D.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 2008 PA Super 178 , 954 A.2d 1222, 1228-29 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 964 A.2d 893 , 600 Pa. 743 ([Pa.]2009) (claim that the trial court failed to consider the defendant’s rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh, 2001 PA Super 77 , 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa.Super.2001) (citing Commonwealth v. Mobley, 581 A.2d 949, 952 , 399 Pa. Super. 108 ([Pa.Super.]1990)) (claim that sentence failed to take into consideration the defendant’s rehabilitative needs and was manifestly excessive did n…
cited
Cited "see"
Com. v. Carboni, D.
See Commonwealth v. Bedell, 954 A.2d 1209 (Pa.Super. 2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 742 , 964 A.2d 893 (2009).
cited
Cited "see"
Com. v. Allen, T.
See Commonwealth v. Bedell, 954 A.2d 1209 (Pa.Super. 2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 742 , 964 A.2d 893 (2009).
cited
Cited "see"
Com. v. Mahan, R.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228-1229 (Pa.Super. 2008), appeal denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009).
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Holmes, B.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 2008 PA Super 178 , 954 A.2d 1222, 1228-29 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 743 , 964 A.2d 893 ) (claim that the trial court failed to consider the defendant's rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh, 2001 PA Super 77 , 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa.Super.2001) (citing Commonwealth v. Mobley, 581 A.2d 949, 952 ([Pa.Super.]1990)) (claim that sentence failed to take into consideration the defendant's rehabilitative needs and was manifestly excessive did not raise a substantial question whe…
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Long, R.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 2008 PA Super 178 , 954 A.2d 1222, 1228-29 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 743 , 964 A.2d 893 ) (claim that the trial court failed to consider the defendant's rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh, 2001 PA Super 77 , 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa.Super.2001) (citing Commonwealth v. Mobley, 581 A.2d 949, 952 ([Pa.Super.]1990)) (claim that sentence failed to take into consideration the defendant's rehabilitative needs and was manifestly excessive did not raise a substantial question whe…
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Clayton, W.
See, Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.22d 1222, 1229 (Pa. Super. 2008) (noting that a substantial question exists where the appellant shows “actions by the sentencing court inconsistent with the Sentencing Code or contrary to the fundamental norms underlying the sentencing process”), appeal denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009).
cited
Cited "see"
Com. v. Levi, R.
See Commonwealth v. Bedell, 954 A.2d 1209, 1216 (Pa.Super. 2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 742 , 964 A.2d 893 (2009) (explaining that issues not raised in PCRA petition are waived). -9-
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Peterson, Z.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228 (Pa.Super. 2008), appeal denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009) (where [appellant] makes a vague and generalized objection on appeal that leaves the trial court to guess at his or her claims, those claims are deemed to have been waived).
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Muhammed, I.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228 (Pa. Super. 2008), app. denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009) (where a defendant makes a vague and generalized objection on appeal that leaves the trial court to guess at his claims, those claims are deemed to have been waived). 2 Because the Nunez family share the same last name, they will be referred to throughout this Opinion by their first names. 3 were in the back food preparation area and Jessica and Laura were at the front registers.
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Wallace, A.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228 (Pa. Super. 2008), app. denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009) (where a defendant makes a vague and generalized objection on appeal that leaves the trial court to guess at his claims, those claims are deemed to have been waived).
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Shaffer, N.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222 , 1228–1229 (Pa. Super. 2008), appeal denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009) (claim that the trial court failed to consider the defendant's rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh, 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa. Super. 2001) (citing Commonwealth v. Mobley, 581 A.2d 949, 952 (Pa. Super. 1990)) (claim that sentence failed to take into consideration the - 12 - J-S79017-18 defendant's rehabilitative needs and was manifestly excessive did not raise a substantial question where sentence was …
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. Wilson, Z.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228 (Pa. Super. 2008), app. denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009) (where a defendant makes a vague and generalized objection on appeal that leaves the trial court to guess at his claims, those claims are deemed to have been waived). 2.
discussed
Cited "see"
Com. v. McNair, A.
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 54 A.2d 1222 , 1228-29 (Pa. Super. 2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 743 , 964 A.2d 893 (2009) (claim that -7 J -S25023-17 the trial court failed to consider the defendant's rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Thus, we cannot conclude, based on the record, that the sentencing court in any other way imposed a harsh and excessive sentence that was disproportionate to the underlying violations and circumstances.
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Swope
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228-29 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 743 , 964 A.2d 893 (2009) (claim that the trial court failed to consider the defendant’s rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh, 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa.Super.2001) (citing Commonwealth v. Mobley, 399 Pa.Super. 108 , 581 A.2d 949, 952 (1990)) (claim that sentence failed to take into consideration the defendant’s rehabilitative needs and was manifestly excessive did not raise a substantial question where sentence was withi…
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Caldwell
(2×)
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222 , 1228– 29 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 964 A.2d 893 ([Pa.]2009) (claim that the trial court failed to consider the defendant’s rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh, 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa.Super.2001) (citing Commonwealth v. Mobley, 581 A.2d 949, 952 ([Pa.Super.]1990)) (claim that sentence failed to take into consideration the defendant’s rehabilitative needs and was manifestly excessive did not raise a substantial question where sentence was within statutory gu…
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Griffin
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228-29 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 743 , 964 A.2d 893 (2009) (claim that the trial court failed to consider the defendant’s rehabilitative needs, age, and educational background did not present a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Coolbaugh, 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa.Super.2001) (citing Commonwealth v. Mobley, 399 Pa.Super. 108 , 581 A.2d 949, 952 (1990)) (claim that sentence failed to take into consideration the defendant’s rehabilitative needs and was manifestly excessive did not raise a substantial question where sentence was withi…
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Lepre
See Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1225-27 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 743 , 964 A.2d 893 (2009).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Com. v. Parks, J.
Finally, this Court has repeatedly held that “an allegation that the trial court failed to consider particular circumstances or factors in an appellant’s case go to the weight accorded to various sentencing factors and do not raise a substantial question.” Commonwealth v. Christine, 78 A.3d 1 , 10–11 (Pa. Super. 2013) (en banc) (per curiam), aff’d, 125 A.3d 394 (Pa. 2013); see also Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222 , 1228–1230 (Pa. Super. 2008) (claim that trial court failed to consider appellant’s rehabilitative -5- J-S54038-18 needs, age, and educational background did not …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Com. v. Garzone, G.
See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Cannon, 954 A.2d 1222, 1228 (Pa. Super. 2008), app. denied, 964 A.2d 893 (Pa. 2009) (where a defendant makes a vague and generalized objection on appeal that leaves the trial court to guess at his claims, those claims are deemed to have been waived).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
COM.
v.
EDRINGTON.
v.
EDRINGTON.
682 MAL (2008).
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Jan 20, 2009.
964 A.2d 893
Published
Citer courts: Superior Court of Pennsylvania (1)
Disposition of petition for allowance of appeal. Denied.