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.
10 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2024 5 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. Christmasgreen2 sentences2021As this Court stated in Commonwealth v. Christmas, 995 A.2d 1259 (Pa. Super. 2010): To demonstrate a violation of his right to a speedy probation revocation hearing, a defendant must allege and prove the delay in holding the revocation hearing prejudiced him. 2017“To demonstrate a violation of his right to a speedy probation revocation hearing, a defendant must allege and prove the delay in holding the revocation hearing prejudiced him.” Christmas, 995 A.2d at 1263 (citations omitted). | 3 | 5 |
Commonwealth v. Parlantegreen1 sentence2022Appellant’s Brief at 4. ____________________________________________ 3 “An appellant whose revocation of probation sentence has been imposed after a revocation proceeding has 30 days to appeal her sentence from the day her sentence is entered, regardless of whether or not she files a post- sentence motion.” Commonwealth v. Parlante, 823 A.2d 927, 929 (Pa. Super. 2003); see also Pa.R.Crim.P. 708 (comment) (“Any appeal must be filed within the 30-day appeal period unless the sentencing judge within 30 days of the imposition of sentence expressly grants reconsideration or vacates the sentence.”). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Marchesanogreen1 sentence2017The meaning of prejudice in the context of providing a prompt revocation hearing “has been interpreted as being something, which could detract from the probative value and reliability of the facts considered, vitiating the reliability of the outcome itself.” Commonwealth v. Marchesano, 544 A.2d 1333, 1336 (Pa. 1988). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Darbygreen1 sentence1982See Commonwealth v. Darby, 244 Pa.Super. 331 , 386 A.2d 746 (1976); Commonwealth v. White, supra. *372 On this record there is no claim that appellant was denied his right to a speedy trial on the underlying firearms offense, or to a speedy probation revocation hearing after his conviction in the court of common pleas. | 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. Woods
green
2 sentences2021Woods, supra. To demonstrate a violation of his right to a speedy probation revocation hearing, a defendant must allege and prove the delay in holding the revocation hearing prejudiced him. 2010Woods, supra. ¶ 13 To demonstrate a violation of his right to a speedy probation revocation hearing, a defendant must allege and prove the delay in holding the revocation hearing prejudiced him. | 4 | 2010–2021 |
Commonwealth v. Clark
green
2 sentences2021Woods, supra at 1229 ; Clark, supra at 125 ; Bischof, supra at 9. 2015Christmas at 1263 (citing Woods, supra at 1229 ; Clark, supra at 125 ; Bischof, supra at 9 ). | 3 | 2010–2021 |
Commonwealth v. Saunders
green
1 sentence2024Saunders, supra. To demonstrate a violation of his right to a speedy probation revocation hearing, a defendant must allege and prove the delay in holding the revocation hearing prejudiced him. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
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.