Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1987–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Fearsgreen1 sentence2017Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795, 803 (Pa. 1 Appellant also pleaded guilty to two similar crimes on separate dockets. 2 The Post Conviction Relief Act was originally known as the Post Conviction Hearing Act (“PCHA”). 3 In his brief, Appellant avers that the sentencing guidelines used to sentence him were the “product of a rejection resolution that was not presented to the Governor in violation of Article III, § 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution[.]” Appellant’s Brief at 9. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Cabezagreen2 sentences1988The appellant's sentence is vacated and his case remanded for resentencing pursuant to the remaining valid provisions of the Sentencing Code.[2] [2] This ruling is applicable to cases where the issue has been "properly preserved at all stages of adjudication up to and including and direct appeal." Commonwealth v. Cabeza, 503 Pa. 228, 233 , 469 A.2d 146, 148 (1983). 1988The appellant's sentence is vacated and his case remanded for resentencing pursuant to the remaining valid provisions of the Sentencing Code.[2] [2] This ruling is applicable to cases where the issue has been "properly preserved at all stages of adjudication up to and including and direct appeal." Commonwealth v. Cabeza, 503 Pa. 228, 233 , 469 A.2d 146, 148 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Sessoms
green
2 sentences1988Sanchez applies this issue preservation directive appearing in footnote 2 of Sessoms (Id., 516 Pa. at 380 , 532 A.2d at 782 ) to the following language in Sessoms : Because the present guidelines were not adopted according to this scheme, however, but were the product of a rejection resolution that was not presented to the Governor in violation of Article III, § 9, they must be declared to be of no force at all. 1988Sanchez applies this issue preservation directive appearing in footnote 2 of Sessoms (Id., 516 Pa. at 380 , 532 A.2d at 782 ) to the following language in Sessoms : Because the present guidelines were not adopted according to this scheme, however, but were the product of a rejection resolution that was not presented to the Governor in violation of Article III, § 9, they must be declared to be of no force at all. | 4 | 1987–2017 |
Shapp v. Sloan
green
2 sentences2013Shapp v. Sloan, 480 Pa. at 464 , 391 A.2d at 602 . 2013Shapp v. Sloan, 480 Pa. at 464 , 391 A.2d at 602 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.