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.
14 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1968–2026 7 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. Dempstergreen1 sentence2026See id.; see also Moury, supra. Nevertheless, we review the merits of Wright’s claim as part of our independent review of the record. 4 See Dempster, supra. Our review of the record reveals that the trial court, although it did not have the benefit of a pre-sentence investigation report, was aware of the requisite sentencing factors. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Mourygreen1 sentence2026See id.; see also Moury, supra. Nevertheless, we review the merits of Wright’s claim as part of our independent review of the record. 4 See Dempster, supra. Our review of the record reveals that the trial court, although it did not have the benefit of a pre-sentence investigation report, was aware of the requisite sentencing factors. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Browngreen1 sentence2024See Commonwealth v. Brown, 186 A.3d 985, 992 (Pa. Super. 2018) (holding evidence sufficient to prove persons not to possess firearms where defendant was a passenger in taxi cab, the driver felt defendant tugging at the jacket where the driver kept a firearm, immediately after defendant left the cab, the driver discovered the gun was missing, and the gun was later found in the possession of a relative of defendant); Commonwealth v. Hopkins, 2023 WL 8183707 , at *4 (Pa. Super., 11/27/23) (unpublished memorandum) (holding the evidence prove persons not to possess firearms, where a police officer | 1 | 1 |
Taylor v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Taylor v. State, 841 N.E.2d 631, 637 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (concluding that statement to forensic interviewer were admissible as the interviewer “did not ask [the victim] leading questions”); Bishop v. State, 982 So. 2d 371, 375 (Miss. 2008) (concluding that victim’s statements to therapist were admissible as “the trial court found ‘nothing to indicate that the child’s statements were suggested or solicited by [the therapist], that many of them were spontaneous narratives and that they were obtained for medical and psychological treatment.”). 2023Taylor v. State, 841 N.E.2d 631, 637 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (concluding that statement to forensic interviewer were admissible as the interviewer “did not ask [the victim] leading questions”); Bishop v. State, 982 So. 2d 371, 375 (Miss. 2008) (concluding that victim’s statements to therapist were admissible as “the trial court found ‘nothing to indicate that the child’s statements were suggested or solicited by [the therapist], that many of them were spontaneous narratives and that they were obtained for medical and psychological treatment.”). | 1 | 1 |
Bishop v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Taylor v. State, 841 N.E.2d 631, 637 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (concluding that statement to forensic interviewer were admissible as the interviewer “did not ask [the victim] leading questions”); Bishop v. State, 982 So. 2d 371, 375 (Miss. 2008) (concluding that victim’s statements to therapist were admissible as “the trial court found ‘nothing to indicate that the child’s statements were suggested or solicited by [the therapist], that many of them were spontaneous narratives and that they were obtained for medical and psychological treatment.”). 2023Taylor v. State, 841 N.E.2d 631, 637 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (concluding that statement to forensic interviewer were admissible as the interviewer “did not ask [the victim] leading questions”); Bishop v. State, 982 So. 2d 371, 375 (Miss. 2008) (concluding that victim’s statements to therapist were admissible as “the trial court found ‘nothing to indicate that the child’s statements were suggested or solicited by [the therapist], that many of them were spontaneous narratives and that they were obtained for medical and psychological treatment.”). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Queengreen1 sentence2022Pa.R.Crim.P. 581(H); see Queen, supra. Wright’s second and third issues are moot based on our disposition of her suppression issue. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Goodwingreen1 sentence2022See Commonwealth v. Goodwin, 928 A.2d 287, 290 (Pa.Super. 2007) (en ____________________________________________ 3 Wright has not filed a response to the Anders brief. -5- J-S35028-22 banc). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. McCoygreen1 sentence2017See id. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Williamsgreen1 sentence2007Id., at 385 (citations omitted). ¶ 8 Wright’s motion for post-conviction DNA testing must be evaluated under 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 9543.1, which took effect in 2002. | 1 | 1 |
Interstate Brands Corporation v. Bakery Drivers & Bakery Goods Vending MacHines Local Union No. 550, International Brotherhood of Teamstersgreen1 sentence2001See, e.g., Interstate Brands Corp. v. Bakery Drivers & Bakery Goods Vending Machines, Local Union No. 550, Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters, 167 F.3d 764, 767-68 (2d Cir.1999). | 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. Smith
green
1 sentence2025The court declared that where parents reside with their children and are capable of rendering care, they have an affirmative duty to care for their children who cannot care for themselves, and because Wright’s child clearly could not care for herself, “the failure of [Wright] and [the child’s mother] to provide care was the cause of her death.” Wright, 237 at *4. ____________________________________________ 7 Under Pa.R.A.P. 126(b), we may cite and rely on non-precedential decisions filed after May 1, 2019, for their persuasive value. - 11 - J-S22035-25 In making this declaration, Wright relie | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Commonwealth v. Hollingshead
green
1 sentence2022Regarding Wright’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence for his SVP designation, “we view all evidence and reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth.” Hollingshead, 111 A.3d at 189 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Hayward v. Medical Center
green
1 sentence2021Ctr. of Beaver Cnty., 608 A.2d 1040 (Pa. 1992)). 5 On appeal, the Township also argues that Wright’s brief to this Court was untimely, and therefore, this Court should dismiss the instant appeal. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Commonwealth v. Staton
green
1 sentence2018Cf. Mebane, supra. Accordingly, Wright’s claim is meritless. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Com. v. Ruiz, J., Jr.
green
1 sentence2016Therefore, Wright’s claim is time-barred.2 See Commonwealth v. Ruiz, 131 A.3d 54 (Pa. Super. 2015) (holding that Alleyne does not invalidate mandatory minimum sentence when claim was presented in an untimely PCRA petition). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Commonwealth v. Fogan
green
2 sentences1975Noting that about a dozen suspects matching the description broadcast by the police were arrested on the night of the shooting, the court ruled that Wright’s detention was part of an illegal “dragnet” arrest of the sort condemned by this Court in Commonwealth v. Fogan, 449 Pa. 552 , 296 A.2d 755 (1972). 1975Noting that about a dozen suspects matching the description broadcast by the police were arrested on the night of the shooting, the court ruled that Wright’s detention was part of an illegal “dragnet” arrest of the sort condemned by this Court in Commonwealth v. Fogan, 449 Pa. 552 , 296 A.2d 755 (1972). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1968A careful reading of Escobedo in light of the gloss placed upon that decision by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 (1966) dictates the conclusion that a statement procured either after failure to give an accused opportunity to consult with counsel or, as in this case, failure to warn an accused of his right to remain silent (under Escobedo), or in the absence of police attempts to advise the accused of his constitutional rights (under Miranda) cannot be employed at trial for any purpose. 1968A careful reading of Escobedo in light of the gloss placed upon that decision by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 (1966) dictates the conclusion that a statement procured either after failure to give an accused opportunity to consult with counsel or, as in this case, failure to warn an accused of his right to remain silent (under Escobedo), or in the absence of police attempts to advise the accused of his constitutional rights (under Miranda) cannot be employed at trial for any purpose. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
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.