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.
19 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2008–2026 9 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. Wrightgreen2 sentences2024Finally, Appellant summarily concludes that the two evidentiary rulings “combined prejudiced the jury as to prevent him from receiving a fair trial.” Appellant’s Br. at 22. “[W]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Wright, 961 A.2d 119, 158 (Pa. 2008); see also Commonwealth v. Small, 980 A.2d 549, 579 (Pa. 2009) (concluding that a broad and vague claim of the prejudicial effect of cumulative errors di 2022In reaching this conclusion we note that our Supreme Court has long recognized that “no number of failed [ineffectiveness] claims may collectively warrant relief if they fail to do so individually.” Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523, 532 (Pa. 2009) (citations omitted). “[W]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Wright, 961 A.2d 119, 158 (Pa. 2008) (emphasis added). | 9 | 10 |
Commonwealth v. Hutchinsongreen2 sentences2026Our Supreme Court has stated that “[w]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 25 A.3d 277, 318-19 (Pa. 2011) (citation omitted). 2026Our Supreme Court has held that “[w]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 25 A.3d 277 , 318–19 (Pa. 2011) (citations omitted). | 7 | 11 |
Commonwealth v. Smallgreen2 sentences2024Finally, Appellant summarily concludes that the two evidentiary rulings “combined prejudiced the jury as to prevent him from receiving a fair trial.” Appellant’s Br. at 22. “[W]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Wright, 961 A.2d 119, 158 (Pa. 2008); see also Commonwealth v. Small, 980 A.2d 549, 579 (Pa. 2009) (concluding that a broad and vague claim of the prejudicial effect of cumulative errors di 2016Moreover, when such a cumulative claim was further reviewed in Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found: '[W]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.' Commonwealth v. Wright, 599 Pa. 270 , 961 A.2d 119, 158 (2008); see also Commonwealth v. Small, 602 Pa. 425 , [475-76] 980 A.2d 549, 579 (2009) (concluding that a 88 See Sections I and II. 79 broad and vague claim of the prejudicial effect of cumula | 4 | 4 |
Commonwealth v. Sepulvedagreen2 sentences2026Additionally, “no number of failed - 35 - J-S02024-26 claims may collectively warrant relief if they fail to do so individually.” Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 55 A.3d 1108, 1150 (Pa. 2012) (citation and brackets omitted). 2025Additionally, “no number of failed claims may collectively warrant - 13 - J-S17028-25 relief i[f] they fail to do so individually.” Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 55 A.3d 1108, 1150 (Pa. 2012) (citation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Johnsongreen1 sentence2022In reaching this conclusion we note that our Supreme Court has long recognized that “no number of failed [ineffectiveness] claims may collectively warrant relief if they fail to do so individually.” Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523, 532 (Pa. 2009) (citations omitted). “[W]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Wright, 961 A.2d 119, 158 (Pa. 2008) (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Michaelgreen2 sentences2008See Commonwealth v. Michael, 562 Pa. 356 , 755 A.2d 1274, 1281 (2000) (citing Commonwealth v. McGill, 545 Pa. 180 , 680 A.2d 1131, 1136 (1996) (there can be no cumulative effect of prejudice when there was no harm in first instance)). 2008See Commonwealth v. Michael, 562 Pa. 356 , 755 A.2d 1274, 1281 (2000) (citing Commonwealth v. McGill, 545 Pa. 180 , 680 A.2d 1131, 1136 (1996) (there can be no cumulative effect of prejudice when there was no harm in first instance)). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. McGillgreen2 sentences2008See Commonwealth v. Michael, 562 Pa. 356 , 755 A.2d 1274, 1281 (2000) (citing Commonwealth v. McGill, 545 Pa. 180 , 680 A.2d 1131, 1136 (1996) (there can be no cumulative effect of prejudice when there was no harm in first instance)). 2008See Commonwealth v. Michael, 562 Pa. 356 , 755 A.2d 1274, 1281 (2000) (citing Commonwealth v. McGill, 545 Pa. 180 , 680 A.2d 1131, 1136 (1996) (there can be no cumulative effect of prejudice when there was no harm in first instance)). | 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. Koehler
green
1 sentence2025However, “[w]hen the failure of individual [PCRA] claims is grounded in lack of prejudice, ... then the cumulative prejudice from those individual claims may properly be assessed.” Koehler, 36 A.3d at 161 - 14 - J-S28030-25 “[W]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 25 A.3d 277, 351-52 (Pa. 2011) (citation omitted). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
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.