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.
13 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 2017–2025 8 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. Deversgreen2 sentences2024See Commonwealth v. Devers, 546 A.2d 12, 18 (Pa. 1988) (“Where pre- sentence reports exist, we shall continue to presume that the sentencing judge was aware of relevant information regarding the defendant’s character and weighed those considerations along with mitigating statutory factors.”); accord Commonwealth v. Rosario, 248 A.3d 599, 614 (Pa. Super. 2021); Commonwealth v. Wallace, 244 A.3d 1261, 1279 (Pa. Super. 2021). 2023N.T. 1/5/22, 2 (the court asked Appellant’s counsel about whether he had a chance to review the report - 14 - J-S01044-23 and whether there were any additions or corrections to it); see Commonwealth v. Devers, 546 A.2d 12, 18 (Pa. 1988) (“Where pre- sentence reports exist, we shall continue to presume that the sentencing judge was aware of relevant information regarding the defendant’s character and weighed those considerations along with mitigating statutory factors.); accord Commonwealth v. Rosario, 248 A.3d 599, 614 (Pa. Super. 2021); Commonwealth v. Wallace, 244 A.3d 1261, 1279 (Pa. Super. | 3 | 3 |
Com. v. Rosario, K.green2 sentences2024See Commonwealth v. Devers, 546 A.2d 12, 18 (Pa. 1988) (“Where pre- sentence reports exist, we shall continue to presume that the sentencing judge was aware of relevant information regarding the defendant’s character and weighed those considerations along with mitigating statutory factors.”); accord Commonwealth v. Rosario, 248 A.3d 599, 614 (Pa. Super. 2021); Commonwealth v. Wallace, 244 A.3d 1261, 1279 (Pa. Super. 2021). 2023N.T. 1/5/22, 2 (the court asked Appellant’s counsel about whether he had a chance to review the report - 14 - J-S01044-23 and whether there were any additions or corrections to it); see Commonwealth v. Devers, 546 A.2d 12, 18 (Pa. 1988) (“Where pre- sentence reports exist, we shall continue to presume that the sentencing judge was aware of relevant information regarding the defendant’s character and weighed those considerations along with mitigating statutory factors.); accord Commonwealth v. Rosario, 248 A.3d 599, 614 (Pa. Super. 2021); Commonwealth v. Wallace, 244 A.3d 1261, 1279 (Pa. Super. | 2 | 2 |
Com. v. Wallace, J.green2 sentences2024See Commonwealth v. Devers, 546 A.2d 12, 18 (Pa. 1988) (“Where pre- sentence reports exist, we shall continue to presume that the sentencing judge was aware of relevant information regarding the defendant’s character and weighed those considerations along with mitigating statutory factors.”); accord Commonwealth v. Rosario, 248 A.3d 599, 614 (Pa. Super. 2021); Commonwealth v. Wallace, 244 A.3d 1261, 1279 (Pa. Super. 2021). 2023N.T. 1/5/22, 2 (the court asked Appellant’s counsel about whether he had a chance to review the report - 14 - J-S01044-23 and whether there were any additions or corrections to it); see Commonwealth v. Devers, 546 A.2d 12, 18 (Pa. 1988) (“Where pre- sentence reports exist, we shall continue to presume that the sentencing judge was aware of relevant information regarding the defendant’s character and weighed those considerations along with mitigating statutory factors.); accord Commonwealth v. Rosario, 248 A.3d 599, 614 (Pa. Super. 2021); Commonwealth v. Wallace, 244 A.3d 1261, 1279 (Pa. Super. | 2 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Ritcheygreen1 sentence2024Appellant’s Brief at 4. ____________________________________________ 1 On January 4, 2024, the trial court entered an amended sentencing order, which added the following, additional term to Appellant’s judgment of sentence: “Pursuant to [61 Pa.C.S.A. § 6137.2, Appellant] shall be subject to [12] months of reentry supervision, which shall be consecutive to the foregoing term of incarceration.” Amended Sentencing Order, 1/4/24, at 1 (emphasis and some capitalization omitted). -2- J-S45007-24 Appellant's claim challenges the discretionary aspects of his sentence. “[S]entencing is a matter vested | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Johnson-Danielsgreen1 sentence2022We note, “[t]he [sentencing] court is not required to parrot the words of the Sentencing Code, stating every factor that must be considered under Section 9721(b), [however,] the record as a whole must reflect due consideration by the court of the statutory considerations at the time of sentencing.” Commonwealth v. Johnson-Daniels, 167 A.3d 17, 26 (Pa. Super. 2017) (internal citation and quotations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Figueroa v. Pennsylvania Department of Correctionsgreen1 sentence2022Commonwealth v. Bowen, 975 A.2d 1120, 1124 (Pa. Super. 2009). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Malovichgreen1 sentence2020See Malovich, 903 A.2d at 1254 (holding that the trial court properly considered the statutory sentencing factors, prior probation violations, and that the defendant was not responding to the court’s authority, accordingly, it did not abuse its discretion in imposing total confinement due to technical probation violations). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Machicote, A., Aplt.green1 sentence2020Commonwealth v. Machicote, 206 A.3d 1110, 1120 (Pa. 2019). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Derrygreen1 sentence2017See Commonwealth v. Derry, 150 A.3d 987 (Pa. Super. 2016) (the sentencing court's failure to consider the statutory sentencing factors under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9721(b) presents a substantial question to review the discretionary aspects of sentences imposed for violations of probation; a -5- J-A07002-17 claim that a sentence is manifestly excessive and constitutes too severe a punishment raises a substantial question). | 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. Eades
green
2 sentences2025Although Appellant correctly notes that the presumption is rebuttable, id. (citing McCain, supra), we do not agree with him that he has rebutted it herein. 2025Appellant does not dispute that the court had a presentence report, and he acknowledges the “general rule … that the existence of a presentence investigation report creates the presumption that the trial court was aware of the defendant’s character and rehabilitative needs, and weighted [sic] those considerations along with the other statutory sentencing factors.” Appellant’s Brief at 23 (citing Commonwealth v. McCain, 176 A.3d 236 , 242 n.3 (Pa. Super. 2017) (citations omitted)). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Com. v. Lawrence, D.
green
1 sentence2025See Reid, 323 A.3d at 29; Lawrence, 313 A.3d at 284-85 ; Pa.R.Crim.P. 720(B)(1)(c); see also Pa.R.A.P. 302(a). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Com. v. Miller, J.
green
1 sentence2023Miller, 275 A.3d at 535 ; Knox, 165 A.3d at 930 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Commonwealth v. Knox
green
1 sentence2023Miller, 275 A.3d at 535 ; Knox, 165 A.3d at 930 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Commonwealth v. Foust
green
1 sentence2019Foust, 180 A.3d at 439 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Commonwealth v. Masip
green
1 sentence2017Id. ____________________________________________ 11 The sentencing court relied on identical language taken from Commonwealth v. Macias, 968 A.2d 773 (Pa. Super. 2009), which simply restated the Devers presumption without direct attribution to Devers. - 33 - J-A26001-16 Instantly, the disconnect between the record and the sentence imposed by the sentencing court is at least as significant as it was in Moore, and demonstrates that the sentencing court here did not properly consider the various statutory sentencing factors, as the court had repeatedly relied on impermissible factors such as unre | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Commonwealth v. MacIas
green
1 sentence2017Id. ____________________________________________ 11 The sentencing court relied on identical language taken from Commonwealth v. Macias, 968 A.2d 773 (Pa. Super. 2009), which simply restated the Devers presumption without direct attribution to Devers. - 33 - J-A26001-16 Instantly, the disconnect between the record and the sentence imposed by the sentencing court is at least as significant as it was in Moore, and demonstrates that the sentencing court here did not properly consider the various statutory sentencing factors, as the court had repeatedly relied on impermissible factors such as unre | 1 | 2017–2017 |
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.