Commonwealth v. Mendez, 71 A.3d 250 (Pa. 2013). · Go Syfert
Search
Commonwealth v. Mendez, 71 A.3d 250 (Pa. 2013). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
31 citation events (31 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Com. v. Jastin, S. (pasuperct, 2015-05-29)
Treatment trajectory · 2014 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2014 2020 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. Jastin, S.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2015 · confidence medium
Our Supreme Court granted Mendez’s petition for allowance of appeal to decide the following issue: “In upholding a sentence that exceeds the statutory maximum explicitly set out in 75 Pa.C.S. § 3803, did not the majority violate the rules of statutory construction in order to avoid what it saw as ‘problematic consequences’ resulting from a straightforward application of the statute?” Mendez, 71 A.3d at 250. 2 Judge Bowes expressed her disagreement with Musau, but acknowledged its binding effect on this Court, in Commonwealth v. Concordia, 97 A.3d 366 (Pa. Super. 2014). 3 Given our d…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Milliken v. Jacono
Pa. · 2014 · confidence medium
Milliken v. Jacono, 71 A.3d 250, 250-51 (Pa.2013) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Caceres, A.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Com. v. Rose, 81 A.3d 123, 129 (Pa. Super. 2013) (“[W]hen performing an ex post facto analysis a court ‘is concerned solely with whether a statute assigns more disadvantageous criminal or penal consequences to an act than did the law ____________________________________________ 8 See Commonwealth v. Grow, 2017 MDA 2013, Order, 9/15/2014. 9 We note that although the Pennsylvania Supreme Court initially granted allowance of appeal on this issue in Commonwealth v. Mendez, 71 A.3d 250 (Pa. 2013), it recently dismissed that appeal as improvidently granted.
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Davis, J.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9763(a) (the term of county intermediate punishment imposed cannot exceed the maximum term for which the defendant could be imprisoned) The Commonwealth urges this Court to ignore Musau due to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania’s grant of review of this issue in Commonwealth v. Mendez, 71 A.3d 250 (Pa. 2013).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania
v.
David C. MENDEZ
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Jul 17, 2013.
71 A.3d 250
Cited by 20 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 17th day of July, 2013, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue is:

In upholding a sentence that exceeds the statutory maximum explicitly set out in 75 Pa.C.S. § 3803, did not the majority violate the rules of statutory construction in order to avoid what it saw as “problematic consequences” resulting from a straightforward application of the statute?