Com. v. Bullock, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009). · Go Syfert
Com. v. Bullock, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“as such, appellant did not give the sentencing judge an opportunity to reconsider or modify sentence on this basis, and, therefore, the claim is waived.”
48 citation events (48 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Com. v. Harris, R. (pasuperct, 2018-08-10)
Treatment trajectory · 2008 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2008 2017 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Com. v. Harris, R.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2018 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
as such, appellant did not give the sentencing judge an opportunity to reconsider or modify sentence on this basis, and, therefore, the claim is waived.
cited Cited "see" Com. v. Varner, E.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877, 881-82 (Pa.Super. 2008), appeal denied, 600 Pa. 774 , 968 A.2d 1280 (2009).
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Murray, D.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877, 879 (Pa. Super. 2008), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009); Commonwealth v. Ferguson, 893 A.2d 735, 737 (Pa. Super. 2006), appeal denied, 906 A.2d 1196 (Pa. 2006).
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Dietrich, S.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2021 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Commonwealth v. Baxter, 956 A.2d 465, 474 (Pa. Super 2008) (en banc), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009) (“[T]he plain language of [subs]ection 6111(g)(4), when taken in proper context of the statute as a whole, clearly places prospective purchasers on notice that they will be subject to prosecution for a third[-]degree felony if they make any oral or written materially false statement in connection with that attempted purchase of a firearm.”); Commonwealth v. Emmil, 866 A.2d 420 (Pa. Super. 2004) (affirming conviction of defendant who made false statements to authorities in co…
cited Cited "see" Com. v. Biggs, M.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Bullock, 948 A.2d 818, 823 (Pa. Super. 2008) (finding claim abandoned when appellant did not develop claim in his brief), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009).
cited Cited "see" Com. v. Kralik, S.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Bullock, 948 A.2d 818, 823 (Pa. Super. 2008) (finding claim abandoned when appellant did not develop claim in his brief), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009).
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Levenberg, F.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Bullock, 948 A.2d 818, 826 (Pa. Super. 2008) (discussing claim that the trial court failed to state adequate reasons for its sentence on the record as a claim pertaining to the discretionary aspects of his sentence), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009).
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Jones, A.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Frank, 577 A.2d 609, 622 (Pa. Super. 1990), appeal _______________________ (Footnote Continued) 5 Even if Appellant had preserved the claim, it is well settled that a claim “that a sentencing court failed to consider or did not adequately consider certain factors does not raise a substantial question that the sentence was inappropriate.” Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877, 880 (Pa. Super. 2008), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Starr, M.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa.2009); (Footnote Continued Next Page) -3- J-A26043-14 Appellant’s claim challenges the discretionary aspects of sentence.
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Kline, A.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877 (Pa.Super.2008), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa.2009); see also Commonwealth v. -5- J-A26032-14 Coolbaugh, 770 A.2d 788, 793 (Pa.Super.2001) (“Appellant’s claim that the court did not consider his personal life situation of having a drug problem does not raise a substantial question”); Commonwealth v. Rhoades, 8 A.3d 912 (Pa.Super.2010) (a claim that the trial court ignored the evidence of an appellant’s alleged brain damage, limited mental capacity, and good behavior in prison is essentially a claim that the trial court inappropriately appli…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Com. v. Pagan Acevedo, L.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2024 · signal: see also · confidence low
However, as this Court has held: “an allegation that the [trial] court did not consider certain mitigating factors does not raise a substantial question.” Commonwealth v. McNabb, 819 A.2d 54, 57 (Pa. Super. 2003); see also Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877, 880 (Pa. Super. 2008) (stating, “an allegation that a sentencing court failed to consider or did not adequately consider certain [mitigating] factors does not raise a substantial question that the sentence was inappropriate”), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Com. v. Adams, C.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2024 · signal: see also · confidence low
However, as this Court has held: “an allegation that the [trial] court did not consider certain mitigating factors does not raise a substantial question.” Commonwealth v. McNabb, 819 A.2d 54, 57 (Pa. Super. 2003); see also Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877, 880 (Pa. Super. 2008) (stating, “an allegation that a sentencing court failed to consider or did not adequately consider certain [mitigating] factors does not raise a substantial question that the sentence was inappropriate”), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009). - 22 - J-S08007-24 Appellant’s claim on appeal does not rais…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Com. v. Burgess, M.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2022 · signal: see also · confidence low
Kiesel, 854 A.2d at 532-533 (stating that, this Court is permitted to overlook an omission in a Rule 2119(f) statement and determine if a substantial question has been presented for review when the Commonwealth, as appellee, fails to object to the omission). - 12 - J-S07010-22 not consider certain mitigating factors does not raise a substantial question.” Commonwealth v. McNabb, 819 A.2d 54, 57 (Pa. Super. 2003); see also Commonwealth v. Johnson, 961 A.2d 877, 880 (Pa. Super. 2008) (stating, “an allegation that a sentencing court failed to consider or did not adequately consider certain [m…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Com. v. Mora Polanco, R.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2018 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Bullock, 948 A.2d 818, 823 (Pa. Super. 2008) (where a trial court directs a concise statement, any issues not raised in that statement shall be waived), appeal denied, 968 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2009). -5- J-S01029-18 Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
COM.
v.
BULLOCK.
279 EAL (2008).
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Apr 14, 2009.
968 A.2d 1280

Disposition of petition for allowance of appeal. Denied.