green
Positive treatment
Trending · 57 recent citers
Quoted verbatim 2×
11.9 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Frein, E., Aplt.
generalizations of the effect of the victim's death on the community at large, or information concerning the particular characteristics of the victim presented in a vacuum will not fall within the ambit of .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Commonwealth v. Natividad
(2×)
Means, 565 Pa. at 332, 773 A.2d at 157.
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Rose
See Commonwealth v. Méans, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143 ,_ 157 (2001) (it is well-established that jurors are- presumed to follow *1132 instructions).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Johnson, C., Aplt.
See Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Hernandez
See Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143, 145 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Jaggers
See Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143, 153 (2001); Fonner v. Shandon, Inc., 555 Pa. 370 , 724 A.2d 903, 906 (1999). ¶ 14 Nor do we believe that a defendant suffers substantial prejudice for not being advised of the details of his right to refuse a test to which he impliedly consented by operating the vehicle.
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Fisher
(2×)
See Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143 (2001) (plurality); see also Commonwealth v. Williams, 578 Pa. 504 , 854 A.2d 440 (2004). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Williams
(2×)
See Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143, 162-167 (2001) (Nigro, J., dissenting).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Howe
See id., 2003 PA Super 419, ¶ 8 , 836 A.2d 159 (citing Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143 (2001)).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Watkins
See also Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143, 147-53 (2001) (Opinion Announcing Judgment of Court) (describing background and history).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Bardo, M.
See also Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143, 147-53 (2001) (Opinion Announcing Judgment of Court) (describing background and history).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Flor
As the Court explained, victim impact evidence is “designed to show [ ] each victim’s uniqueness as a human being.” Id. at 823 , 111 S.Ct. 2597 (citation omitted); see also Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143, 150 (2001) (Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court) (discussing Payne in the context of capital sentencing, where victim impact testimony “conveys to the jury that the decedent was a unique individual whose loss affects society”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Hughes
(2×)
See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Harris, 572 Pa. 489, 524 , 817 A.2d 1033, 1054 (2002). 42 Although in Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309 , 773 A.2d 143 (2001) (Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court), a plurality of the Court stated that relevant evidence under Section 9711(a)(2) was not limited to aggravating and mitigating circumstances; this pronouncement was in relation to the ability of the Commonwealth to introduce victim impact testimony pursuant to a specific statutory authorization within the same provision.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Fisher
(2×)
Of additional significance, Section 9711(a)(2) of the Sentencing Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 9711(a)(2), provides that "evidence may be presented as to any other matter that the court deems relevant and admissible on the question of the sentence to be imposed." Id.; see also Commonwealth v. Means, 565 Pa. 309, 324-25 , 773 A.2d 143, 152-52 (2001) (plurality opinion) (concluding that, pursuant to Section 9711(a)(2), relevant evidence is not limited to statutory aggravators and mitigators). [4] Notwithstanding the United States Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment interpretation, as a matter of statutory in…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cecelia FRANCIS, an Individual
v.
C. Crady SWISHER, III, an Individual
v.
C. Crady SWISHER, III, an Individual
Petition No. 730 Western District Allocatur Docket 2000.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Jun 20, 2001.
Published
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (2)
ORDER
PER CURIAM:AND NOW, this 20th day of June, 2001, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is granted on the following issue:
Is the trial court order denying Petitioner’s Petition for Relief from Default Judgment appealable as of right pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 311(a)(1)?
Appeal to be submitted on briefs.