issue involving a jury instruction in Pennsylvania

28 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 2005–2026 11 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.

Followed or applied (12)

Case	Followed	Cited
Commonwealth v. Pressleygreen pa · 2005 · cited in 25 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2005–2026 2 sentences 2026It is well-settled that a “specific and timely objection must be made to preserve [a] challenge to [a] particular jury instruction[, and] failure to do so results in waiver[.]” Commonwealth v. Forbes, 867 A.2d 1268, 1274 (Pa. Super. 2005) (citation omitted); see also See also Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2005)("The pertinent rules [of Criminal Procedure] . . . require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court's ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction. "). 2026Here, the trial court explained: Our Supreme Court has held that the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure “require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction.” Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2005); see Pa.R.Crim.P. 647(C) (“No portions of the charge nor omissions from the charge may be assigned as error, unless specific objections are made thereto before the jury retires to deliberate.”); Pa.R.Crim.P. 603(B) (The rule eliminating the requirement of a request for an ex	23	25
Commonwealth v. Mourygreen pasuperct · 2010 · cited in 2 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2014–2023 2 sentences 2023Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2005) (footnotes and citations omitted); see Commonwealth v. Garang, 9 A.3d 237, 244-245 (Pa. Super. 2010) (citations omitted); Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162, 178 (Pa. Super. 2010) (citations omitted). 2014Commonwealth v. Charleston, 16 A.3d 505, 527-528 (Pa. Super. 2011), appeal denied, 30 A.3d 486 (Pa. 2011), quoting Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162, 178 (Pa. Super. 2010); see also Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2009) (holding “a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point [is required] to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction”); Pa.R.Crim.P. 647(B) (providing “[n]o portions of the charge nor omissions from the charge may be assigned as error, unless specific objections are made thereto before the jury retires t	2	2
Commonwealth v. Parkergreen pasuperct · 2014 · cited in 2 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021 2 sentences 2021Commonwealth v. Parker, 104 A.3d 17, 29 (Pa. Super. 2014) (emphasis added; some citations omitted). 2021Commonwealth v. Parker, 104 A.3d 17, 29 (Pa. Super. 2014) (emphasis added; some citations omitted).	2	2
Commonwealth v. Forbesgreen pasuperct · 2005 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026 1 sentence 2026It is well-settled that a “specific and timely objection must be made to preserve [a] challenge to [a] particular jury instruction[, and] failure to do so results in waiver[.]” Commonwealth v. Forbes, 867 A.2d 1268, 1274 (Pa. Super. 2005) (citation omitted); see also See also Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2005)("The pertinent rules [of Criminal Procedure] . . . require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court's ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction. ").	1	1
Commonwealth v. Garanggreen pasuperct · 2010 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023 1 sentence 2023Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2005) (footnotes and citations omitted); see Commonwealth v. Garang, 9 A.3d 237, 244-245 (Pa. Super. 2010) (citations omitted); Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162, 178 (Pa. Super. 2010) (citations omitted).	1	1
Commonwealth v. Evansgreen pasuperct · 1995 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022A missing witness instruction is appropriate where the “witness is available to only one of the parties to a trial, and it appears this witness has special information material to the issue, and this person’s testimony would not merely be cumulative[.]” Commonwealth v. Evans, 664 A.2d 570, 573 (Pa. Super. 1995). 2022A missing witness instruction is appropriate where the “witness is available to only one of the parties to a trial, and it appears this witness has special information material to the issue, and this person’s testimony would not merely be cumulative[.]” Commonwealth v. Evans, 664 A.2d 570 , 573 (Pa. Super. 1995).	1	1
Commonwealth v. Olsengreen pasuperct · 2013 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 1 sentence 2018See Commonwealth v. Olsen, supra. As the trial court cogently stated, “To preserve an issue involving a jury instruction for appeal, the Defendant must make a specific objection on the record.	1	1
Commonwealth v. Boylegreen pasuperct · 1999 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017 1 sentence 2017Commonwealth v. Boyle, 733 A.2d 633, 638 (Pa. Super. 1999). - 22 - J-A07034-17 from the charge may be assigned as error, unless specific objections are made thereto before the jury retires to deliberate.” See also Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2005) (holding that “[t]he pertinent rules [of Criminal Procedure] … require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction”).	1	1
Commonwealth v. Charlestongreen pasuperct · 2011 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 1 sentence 2014Commonwealth v. Charleston, 16 A.3d 505, 527-528 (Pa. Super. 2011), appeal denied, 30 A.3d 486 (Pa. 2011), quoting Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162, 178 (Pa. Super. 2010); see also Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2009) (holding “a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point [is required] to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction”); Pa.R.Crim.P. 647(B) (providing “[n]o portions of the charge nor omissions from the charge may be assigned as error, unless specific objections are made thereto before the jury retires t	1	1
Commonwealth v. Thomasgreen pasuperct · 2006 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 1 sentence 2014Commonwealth v. Thomas, 904 A.2d 964, 970 (Pa. Super. 2006) (internal citations, quotation marks, and brackets omitted).	1	1
Commonwealth v. Garciagreen pa · 2005 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 2 sentences 2008All such objections shall be made beyond the hearing of the jury.” The Supreme Court has held that this rule requires “a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point [for charge in order] to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction.” Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624, 630 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (2005). (footnote omitted) See also, Commonwealth v. Garcia, 585 Pa. 160, 164 , 888 A.2d 633, 636 (2005). 2008All such objections shall be made beyond the hearing of the jury.” The Supreme Court has held that this rule requires “a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point [for charge in order] to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction.” Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624, 630 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (2005). (footnote omitted) See also, Commonwealth v. Garcia, 585 Pa. 160, 164 , 888 A.2d 633, 636 (2005).	1	1
Commonwealth v. Martinezgreen pa · 1977 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 2 sentences 2005See Martinez, 475 Pa. at 337-38 , 380 A.2d at 750-51 . 2005See Martinez, 475 Pa. at 337-38 , 380 A.2d at 750-51 .	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

Case	Cited	Years
Com. v. Graham green pa · 2010 1 sentence 2019S17034/19 Our supreme court has further explained that a party must raise a "specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court's ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction." Id., quoting Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2005) (citations omitted).	1	2019–2019
Com. v. Bierley green pa · 2011 1 sentence 2014Commonwealth v. Charleston, 16 A.3d 505, 527-528 (Pa. Super. 2011), appeal denied, 30 A.3d 486 (Pa. 2011), quoting Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162, 178 (Pa. Super. 2010); see also Commonwealth v. Pressley, 887 A.2d 220, 224 (Pa. 2009) (holding “a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point [is required] to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction”); Pa.R.Crim.P. 647(B) (providing “[n]o portions of the charge nor omissions from the charge may be assigned as error, unless specific objections are made thereto before the jury retires t	1	2014–2014
Com. v. Judd green pa · 2006 2 sentences 2010In so finding, this Court relied upon our Supreme Court's decision in Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624, 631 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (2005), on remand to, Commonwealth v. Pressley, 903 A.2d 50 (Pa.Super.2006), appeal denied, 590 Pa. 676 , 912 A.2d 1291 (2006) wherein the Court stated, inter alia that: The pertinent rules, therefore, require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court's ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction. 2010In so finding, this Court relied upon our Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624, 631 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (2005), on remand to, Commonwealth v. Pressley, 903 A.2d 50 (Pa.Super.2006), appeal denied, 590 Pa. 676 , 912 A.2d 1291 (2006) wherein the Court stated, inter alia that: The pertinent rules, therefore, require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction.	1	2010–2010
Com. v. REED, E. neutral pasuperct · 2006 2 sentences 2010In so finding, this Court relied upon our Supreme Court's decision in Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624, 631 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (2005), on remand to, Commonwealth v. Pressley, 903 A.2d 50 (Pa.Super.2006), appeal denied, 590 Pa. 676 , 912 A.2d 1291 (2006) wherein the Court stated, inter alia that: The pertinent rules, therefore, require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court's ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction. 2010In so finding, this Court relied upon our Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Pressley, 584 Pa. 624, 631 , 887 A.2d 220, 224 (2005), on remand to, Commonwealth v. Pressley, 903 A.2d 50 (Pa.Super.2006), appeal denied, 590 Pa. 676 , 912 A.2d 1291 (2006) wherein the Court stated, inter alia that: The pertinent rules, therefore, require a specific objection to the charge or an exception to the trial court’s ruling on a proposed point to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction.	1	2010–2010

Statutes the citing opinions construe

PA § 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2502 (5) PA § 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 901 (4) PA § 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2503 (3) PA § 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2701 (3) PA § 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2702 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

PA 28 (2005–2026) UT 4 (2001–2013)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check