Commonwealth v. Bishop, T., 217 A.3d 833 (Pa. 2019). · Go Syfert
Search
Commonwealth v. Bishop, T., 217 A.3d 833 (Pa. 2019). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
119 citation events (119 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Commonwealth v. Shivers, P., Aplt., No. 50 EAP 2024 (Pa. July 21, 2026)
Treatment trajectory · 2020 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2020 2023 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 838 Waiver of constitutional claims by failure to preserve issue4 citing cases
  • Com. v. Bishop, S., No. 183 EDA 2025 (Pa. Super. Ct. June 9, 2026).unpublished 3 cites
    Whether the PCRA court erred in dismissing [Bishop’s] petition where trial counsel was ineffective for failing to distinguish ____________________________________________ 1 Although our Supreme Court did not reach the merits, it noted that…
  • In the Interest of: Y.W.-B. Apl of: J.B., 265 A.3d 602 (Pa. 2021).published
    Id. at 838, 841.
  • In the Interest of: N.W.-B. Apl of: J.B., No. 2 EAP 2021 (Pa. Dec. 23, 2021).published
    Id. at 838, 841.
  • Com. v. Shazad, W., No. 1423 EDA 2019 (Pa. Super. Ct. Nov. 10, 2020).unpublished
    See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b); Phillips, 141 A.3d at 522 ; see also Wolfel, 233 A.3d at 790; Bishop, 217 A.3d at 838-42.
At page 840 Requiring analysis for departure from federal jurisprudence3 citing casesto raise claims for departure from federal constitutional jurisprudence on independent state grounds . . . some analysis explaining the grounds for departure is required2 citing courts put it this way
  • Commonwealth v. Shivers, P., Aplt., No. 50 EAP 2024 (Pa. July 21, 2026).published 26 cites
    (the precedent of this Court requires . . . some analysis explaining the grounds for departure)
  • In Re: Mark B. Cohen, J., 349 A.3d 865 (Pa. 2026).published 2 cites
    (to raise claims for departure from federal constitutional jurisprudence on independent state grounds . . . some analysis explaining the grounds for departure is required)
  • Commonwealth v. Alexander, K., Aplt., 243 A.3d 177 (Pa. 2020).published 2 cites
    In Bishop, we explained in no uncertain terms that a defendant must “assert in the trial court that the state constitutional provision at issue should be interpreted more expansively than the federal counterpart and provide reasons for int…
concluding that, while appellant raised departure claim under Pennsylvania constitution in petition for allowance of appeal, appellant nevertheless waived claim when appellant did not argue issue before suppression court nor develop any reasoning before appellate courtno pin page on record · 2 citing cases listed
  • Com. v. Rothhaar, D., No. 64 EDA 2024 (Pa. Super. Ct. Oct. 27, 2025).unpublished 2 cites
    (concluding that, while appellant raised departure claim under Pennsylvania constitution in petition for allowance of appeal, appellant nevertheless waived claim when appellant did not argue issue before suppression cour…)
  • Commonwealth v. Foster, K., Aplt., 332 A.3d 1187 (Pa. 2025).published
    (concluding that, while appellant raised departure claim under Pennsylvania Constitution in petition for allowance of appeal, appellant nevertheless waived claim when appellant did not argue issue before suppression cour…)
At page 836 cited at this page2 citing cases
  • Commonwealth v. Shivers, P., Aplt., No. 50 EAP 2024 (Pa. July 21, 2026).published 26 cites
    Bishop’s formalization of threshold preservation requirements made 27 Edmunds, 586 A.2d at 895 (summarizing the requirement set forth in Michigan v. Long). 28 Id. at 895 . 29 Id. 30 See Pap's A.M., 812 A.2d at 603 (finding it “helpful” to…
  • Com. v. Bishop, S., No. 183 EDA 2025 (Pa. Super. Ct. June 9, 2026).unpublished 3 cites
    Whether the PCRA court erred in dismissing [Bishop’s] petition where trial counsel was ineffective for failing to distinguish ____________________________________________ 1 Although our Supreme Court did not reach the merits, it noted that…
At page 841 cited at this page2 citing cases
  • Commonwealth v. Shivers, P., Aplt., No. 50 EAP 2024 (Pa. July 21, 2026).published 26 cites
    Bishop’s formalization of threshold preservation requirements made 27 Edmunds, 586 A.2d at 895 (summarizing the requirement set forth in Michigan v. Long). 28 Id. at 895 . 29 Id. 30 See Pap's A.M., 812 A.2d at 603 (finding it “helpful” to…
  • Com. v. Romesburg, T., No. 669 WDA 2022 (Pa. Super. Ct. July 7, 2023).unpublished 2 cites
    Bishop, 217 A.3d at 841.
At page 835 noting that the Fifth Amendment, as construed by Patane, does not require suppression of physical evidence recovered as the result of defendant’s statement made during a custodial interrogation without appraisal of the required Miranda warnings; Pennsylvania state law had not recognized a deviation…1 citing case1 citing court put it this way
  • Com. v. Long, S, No. 1580 EDA 2024 (Pa. Super. Ct. July 15, 2025).unpublished
    (noting that the Fifth Amendment, as construed by Patane, does not require suppression of physical evidence recovered as the result of defendant’s statement made during a custodial interrogation without appraisal of the…)
At page 851 cited at this page1 citing case
  • Com. v. Garcia, L., No. 877 EDA 2023 (Pa. Super. Ct. Oct. 30, 2024).unpublished
    The United States Supreme Court and Pennsylvania Supreme Court have “declined to hold that Miranda violations trigger the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.” See Bishop, 217 A.3d at 851.
Other citing cases13 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Show 3 more citing cases
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Commonwealth
v.
Bishop, T.
153 EAL 2019.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Jul 30, 2019.
Published opinion
✓ 217 A.3d 833 recovered from 44 citing opinions
✓ 655 Pa. 270 recovered from 44 citing opinions
Published
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EASTERN DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,Respondentv.TYRELL O. BISHOP,Petitioner
No. 153 EAL 2019Petition for Allowance of Appeal fromthe Order of the Superior Court
ORDER
[*~833–839]

PER CURIAM

[*~833–840]

AND NOW, this 30th day of July, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

[*~846–851]

DENIED.