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.
12 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1977–2026 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Com. v. Carter, P.green1 sentence2026Commonwealth v. Carter, 320 A.3d 140, 143-46 (Pa. Super. 2024) (citations and footnotes omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Shawgreen1 sentence2026Specifically, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has explained: “In determining whether a foreign state’s statute is equivalent to a Pennsylvania crime under Section 9714 [of the Judicial Code], . . . the court must consider ‘the elements of the foreign offense in terms of classification of the conduct proscribed, its definition of the offense, and the requirements for culpability.’” Commonwealth v. Northrip, 985 A.2d 734, 740 (Pa. 2009) (quoting Commonwealth v. Shaw, 744 A.2d 739, 743 (Pa. 2000) (citation omitted) (superseded by statute)). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Dempstergreen1 sentence2023See id.; see also Moury, supra. Nevertheless, we review the merits of Carter’s claim as part of our independent review of the record.15 See Dempster, supra. Our review of the record reveals that, at sentencing, the trial court considered testimony ____________________________________________ 15 We note that Attorney Fiorillo has failed to include a Rule 2119(f) statement in the Anders brief; however, this omission is not an impediment to our review in this case. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Mourygreen1 sentence2023See id.; see also Moury, supra. Nevertheless, we review the merits of Carter’s claim as part of our independent review of the record.15 See Dempster, supra. Our review of the record reveals that, at sentencing, the trial court considered testimony ____________________________________________ 15 We note that Attorney Fiorillo has failed to include a Rule 2119(f) statement in the Anders brief; however, this omission is not an impediment to our review in this case. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Austingreen1 sentence2023See Commonwealth v. Austin, 66 A.3d 798, 807-08 (Pa. Super. 2013). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Zeiglergreen1 sentence2023See Commonwealth v. Zeigler, 112 A.3d 656, 661 (Pa. Super. 2015) (where counsel filed Anders brief, this Court reviewed discretionary sentencing claim even absent Rule 2119(f) statement). - 16 - J-S32040-22 and letters from one of Carter’s daughters, Megan Truscott, Carter’s lifelong best friend, Linda Olano, the pastor at Carter’s church, Jeremy Smallwood, and Ashley Stumhofer, a fellow inmate. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Cartergreen1 sentence2020See Commonwealth v. Carter, 656 A.2d 463, 466 (Pa. 1995) (Carter’s plea knowing and voluntary were, even though he was not told sentences could run consecutively, he was informed of maximum sentence for each count and his sentence was less than the maximum). | 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. Banks
green
2 sentences2020Commonwealth v. Banks, 165 A.3d 976 , 980- 81 (Pa. Super. 2017). 2020Commonwealth v. Banks, 165 A.3d 976 , 980- 81 (Pa. Super. 2017). | 2 | 2020–2020 |
Commonwealth v. Carter
green
2 sentences2017Commonwealth v. Carter, 105 A.3d 765 , 768–69 (Pa.Super. 2014) (en banc) (footnote omitted). -7- J-S40008-17 In Carter, this Court reversed the trial court’s grant of Carter’s motion to suppress, finding his Fourth Amendment rights were not violated when the arresting officer seized Carter and conducted a limited pat-down after observing him in a high crime area at night with a weighed and angled bulge in his coat pocket. 2015Cf. id. at 767 . | 2 | 2015–2017 |
Commonwealth v. Carter
green
2 sentences1977The Pennsylvania rule requiring the prosecution to make the names and whereabouts of material eyewitnesses available to the defense . . . requires reversal of the instant conviction.” (Emphasis in original.) The Carter rule requiring disclosure of the names and whereabouts of material eyewitnesses was based on an . . awareness that the testimonial perspective of police officers is conditioned by the ‘often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime.’ ” Id. 427 Pa. at 61 , 233 A.2d at 288 . 1977The Pennsylvania rule requiring the prosecution to make the names and whereabouts of material eyewitnesses available to the defense . . . requires reversal of the instant conviction.” (Emphasis in original.) The Carter rule requiring disclosure of the names and whereabouts of material eyewitnesses was based on an . . awareness that the testimonial perspective of police officers is conditioned by the ‘often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime.’ ” Id. 427 Pa. at 61 , 233 A.2d at 288 . | 2 | 1977–2015 |
Commonwealth v. Northrip
green
1 sentence2026Specifically, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has explained: “In determining whether a foreign state’s statute is equivalent to a Pennsylvania crime under Section 9714 [of the Judicial Code], . . . the court must consider ‘the elements of the foreign offense in terms of classification of the conduct proscribed, its definition of the offense, and the requirements for culpability.’” Commonwealth v. Northrip, 985 A.2d 734, 740 (Pa. 2009) (quoting Commonwealth v. Shaw, 744 A.2d 739, 743 (Pa. 2000) (citation omitted) (superseded by statute)). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Falasco v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole
green
1 sentence2024Falasco, 521 A.2d at 995 ; Gregory, 530 A.2d at 1050 . 5 Initially, we reject Carter’s claim alleging an illegal sentence rooted in an erroneous birthdate and social security number. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Gregory v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole
green
1 sentence2024Falasco, 521 A.2d at 995 ; Gregory, 530 A.2d at 1050 . 5 Initially, we reject Carter’s claim alleging an illegal sentence rooted in an erroneous birthdate and social security number. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Commonwealth v. Steele
green
2 sentences2020In fact, much of the juror’s letter, and Lampe’s argument, focuses on the alleged statements made by the jurors themselves, which testimony is not eligible for the Carter exception to the “no impeachment rule.” See Steele, supra. Moreover, juror #9’s proposed testimony is not - 29 - J-A15016-20 limited to outside influences, see id., as that juror proposed to testify that she and the other jurors were “unaware they could go home that evening without first rendering a verdict.” Appellant’s Brief, at 57. 2020In fact, much of the juror’s letter, and Lampe’s argument, focuses on the alleged statements made by the jurors themselves, which testimony is not eligible for the Carter exception to the “no impeachment rule.” See Steele, supra. Moreover, juror #9’s proposed testimony is not - 29 - J-A15016-20 limited to outside influences, see id., as that juror proposed to testify that she and the other jurors were “unaware they could go home that evening without first rendering a verdict.” Appellant’s Brief, at 57. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
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.