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.
8 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 2018–2023 3 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. Johnson-Danielsgreen2 sentences2019The trial court must consider the totality of the circumstances at the time of the withdrawal request, including “the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing.” Johnson-Daniels, 167 A.3d at 24 .9 ____________________________________________ 9 Compare Commonwealth v. Islas, 156 A.3d 1185, 1192 (Pa.Super. 2017) (finding defendant’s claim of innocence was plausible where defendant had previously protested his innocence to law 2018Commonwealth v. Blango, 150 A.3d 45, 47 (Pa. Super. 2016) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [T]he determination of whether there is a “fair and just reason” to permit the pre-sentence withdrawal request should be based on the totality of the circumstances attendant at the time of the request, including the timing of the assertion of innocence, the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing. 1 Both Appellant and the tr | 4 | 6 |
Commonwealth v. Islasgreen2 sentences2023Norton, 201 A.3d at 121-22 ; Garcia, 280 A.3d at 1027 ; Islas, 156 A.3d at 1190-91 . [T]he determination of whether there is a “fair and just reason” to permit the pre-sentence withdrawal request should be based on the totality of the circumstances attendant at the time of the request, including the timing of the assertion of innocence, the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing. 2019The trial court must consider the totality of the circumstances at the time of the withdrawal request, including “the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing.” Johnson-Daniels, 167 A.3d at 24 .9 ____________________________________________ 9 Compare Commonwealth v. Islas, 156 A.3d 1185, 1192 (Pa.Super. 2017) (finding defendant’s claim of innocence was plausible where defendant had previously protested his innocence to law | 2 | 3 |
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Carrasquillo, J.green2 sentences2021Commonwealth v. Johnson-Daniels, 167 A.3d 17, 24 (Pa. Super. 2017), quoting Carrasquillo, 115 A.3d at 1286, 1292-93 (emphasis added). 2018Commonwealth v. Blango, 150 A.3d 45, 47 (Pa. Super. 2016) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [T]he determination of whether there is a “fair and just reason” to permit the pre-sentence withdrawal request should be based on the totality of the circumstances attendant at the time of the request, including the timing of the assertion of innocence, the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing. 1 Both Appellant and the tr | 2 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Davisgreen1 sentence2019The trial court must consider the totality of the circumstances at the time of the withdrawal request, including “the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing.” Johnson-Daniels, 167 A.3d at 24 .9 ____________________________________________ 9 Compare Commonwealth v. Islas, 156 A.3d 1185, 1192 (Pa.Super. 2017) (finding defendant’s claim of innocence was plausible where defendant had previously protested his innocence to law | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Williamsgreen1 sentence2019The trial court must consider the totality of the circumstances at the time of the withdrawal request, including “the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing.” Johnson-Daniels, 167 A.3d at 24 .9 ____________________________________________ 9 Compare Commonwealth v. Islas, 156 A.3d 1185, 1192 (Pa.Super. 2017) (finding defendant’s claim of innocence was plausible where defendant had previously protested his innocence to law | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Currygreen2 sentences2018See id. 2018See Baez, supra. Specifically, Gathright made his assertion of innocence on the day before the scheduled sentencing hearing and, in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding Gathright’s assertion was not plausible. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Blangogreen1 sentence2018Commonwealth v. Blango, 150 A.3d 45, 47 (Pa. Super. 2016) (citations and quotation marks omitted). [T]he determination of whether there is a “fair and just reason” to permit the pre-sentence withdrawal request should be based on the totality of the circumstances attendant at the time of the request, including the timing of the assertion of innocence, the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing. 1 Both Appellant and the tr | 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. Norton, M., Aplt.
green
1 sentence2023Norton, 201 A.3d at 121-22 ; Garcia, 280 A.3d at 1027 ; Islas, 156 A.3d at 1190-91 . [T]he determination of whether there is a “fair and just reason” to permit the pre-sentence withdrawal request should be based on the totality of the circumstances attendant at the time of the request, including the timing of the assertion of innocence, the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Com. v. Garcia, F.
green
1 sentence2023Norton, 201 A.3d at 121-22 ; Garcia, 280 A.3d at 1027 ; Islas, 156 A.3d at 1190-91 . [T]he determination of whether there is a “fair and just reason” to permit the pre-sentence withdrawal request should be based on the totality of the circumstances attendant at the time of the request, including the timing of the assertion of innocence, the statements made by the defendant in association with his declaration of innocence, and the plausibility of the defendant’s statements in light of the evidentiary proffer made by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Commonwealth v. Morrison
green
1 sentence2020Morrison, 878 A.2d at 105-06 . -3- Contrary to Appellant’s contention, the facts set forth by the Commonwealth at the plea hearing are plainly sufficient to support a finding that Appellant was guilty of third-degree murder. | 1 | 2020–2020 |