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.
35 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 2018–2026 18 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. Fudgegreen2 sentences2026Put differently, “we will not disturb a suppression court’s credibility determinations absent a clear and manifest error.” Commonwealth v. McMaster, 320 A.3d 85, 88 (Pa. Super. 2024) (quoting Commonwealth v. Fudge, 213 A.3d 321, 326 (Pa. Super. 2019)). 2024Therefore, “we will not disturb a suppression court’s credibility determinations absent a clear and manifest error.” Id. (citation omitted). | 11 | 19 |
Commonwealth v. Camachogreen2 sentences2019This Court will not disturb a suppression court's credibility determination absent a clear and manifest error. *327 Commonwealth v. Cama cho , 425 Pa.Super. 567 , 625 A.2d 1242 , 1245 (1993). 2019This Court will not disturb a suppression court's credibility determination absent a clear and manifest error. *327 Commonwealth v. Cama cho , 425 Pa.Super. 567 , 625 A.2d 1242 , 1245 (1993). | 11 | 13 |
Commonwealth v. McCoygreen2 sentences2020See Commonwealth v. Fudge, 213 A.3d 321, 326 (Pa. Super. 2019) (citation omitted) (noting that we will not disturb a suppression court’s weight and credibility absent a clear and manifest error), appeal denied, No. 422 MAL 2019, 2019 WL 7207309 (Pa. filed December 27, 2019); see also Commonwealth v. McCoy, 154 A.3d 813, 816 (Pa. Super. 2017) (“[I]t is within the lower court's province to pass on the credibility of witnesses and determine the weight to be given to their testimony.”). - 12 - positioning of himself directly beside [him] during the blood draw was somehow coercive, the [c]ourt find 2020See Commonwealth v. Fudge, 213 A.3d 321, 326 (Pa. Super. 2019) (citation omitted) (noting that we will not disturb a suppression court’s weight and credibility absent a clear and manifest error), appeal denied, No. 422 MAL 2019, 2019 WL 7207309 (Pa. filed December 27, 2019); see also Commonwealth v. McCoy, 154 A.3d 813, 816 (Pa. Super. 2017) (“[I]t is within the lower court’s province to pass on the credibility of witnesses and determine the weight to be given to their testimony.”). 3 The Commonwealth seemingly concedes that Officer Royer enforced the doctor’s directive for Appellant to go to | 2 | 2 |
Com. v. Carmenates, V.green2 sentences2026As to the legal conclusions of the suppression court, we afford them no deference “and review them de novo.” Carmenates, 266 A.3d at 1123 . 2026See Carmenates, supra, at 1123 (appellate courts must be highly deferential to a suppression court’s credibility determination); Commonwealth v. Cunningham, 287 A.3d 1 , 7 (Pa. Super. 2022) (“[W]e will not disturb a suppression court’s credibility determinations absent a clear and manifest error.”). | 1 | 2 |
Com. v. Carver, J.green1 sentence2026Commonwealth v. Carver, 318 A.3d 386, 389-90 (Pa. Super. 2024) (emphasis added; internal citations and quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Com. v. Cunningham, D.green1 sentence2026See Carmenates, supra, at 1123 (appellate courts must be highly deferential to a suppression court’s credibility determination); Commonwealth v. Cunningham, 287 A.3d 1 , 7 (Pa. Super. 2022) (“[W]e will not disturb a suppression court’s credibility determinations absent a clear and manifest error.”). | 1 | 1 |
Com. v. McMaster, D., Jr.green1 sentence2026Put differently, “we will not disturb a suppression court’s credibility determinations absent a clear and manifest error.” Commonwealth v. McMaster, 320 A.3d 85, 88 (Pa. Super. 2024) (quoting Commonwealth v. Fudge, 213 A.3d 321, 326 (Pa. Super. 2019)). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Byrdgreen1 sentence2022Fudge, supra at 326 ; see Byrd, supra at 1019 . | 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. Millner
green
1 sentence2024We will therefore “not disturb a suppression court’s credibility determination[s] absent a clear and manifest error.” Id. (citation omitted). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Commonwealth v. Fudge, D.
neutral
1 sentence2022“This Court will not disturb a suppression court’s credibility determination absent a clear and manifest error.” Commonwealth v. Fudge, 213 A.3d 321, 326 (Pa. Super. 2019), appeal denied, 222 A.3d 747 (Pa. 2019) (citation omitted). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.