relied on improper factors (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

relied on improper factors in Pennsylvania

8 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 2016–2026 2 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.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Commonwealth v. Downinggreen
pasuperct · 2010 · cited in 3 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2019–2020
2 sentences

2020Commonwealth v. Downing, 990 A.2d 788, 792 (Pa. Super. 2010). -7- J-A07024-20 Appellant contends that the court abused its discretion and imposed an unreasonable sentence outside the guidelines because “[t]here were excellent reasons to not impose aggravated range sentences, much less to run them consecutively.” Id. at 17.

2019Commonwealth v. Lewis, 45 A.3d 405, 411 (Pa.Super. 2012) (en banc) (finding that allegations that the sentencing court focused exclusively on the seriousness of the crime raises a plausible argument that the court did not follow the requirements of section 9721 of Sentencing Guidelines); see also Commonwealth v. Downing, 990 A.2d 788, 792 (Pa.Super. 2010) (holding that a claim that the court relied on improper factor raises substantial question).

33
Scheib v. AP Realty, Inc.green
pa · 2012 · cited in 2 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
2 sentences

2019Commonwealth v. Lewis, 45 A.3d 405, 411 (Pa.Super. 2012) (en banc) (finding that allegations that the sentencing court focused exclusively on the seriousness of the crime raises a plausible argument that the court did not follow the requirements of section 9721 of Sentencing Guidelines); see also Commonwealth v. Downing, 990 A.2d 788, 792 (Pa.Super. 2010) (holding that a claim that the court relied on improper factor raises substantial question).

2019Commonwealth v. Lewis, 45 A.3d 405, 411 (Pa.Super. 2012) (en banc) (finding that allegations that the sentencing court focused exclusively on the seriousness of the crime raises a plausible argument that the court did not follow the requirements of section 9721 of Sentencing Guidelines); see also Commonwealth v. Downing, 990 A.2d 788, 792 (Pa.Super. 2010) (holding that a claim that the court relied on improper factor raises substantial question).

22
Com. v. Crawford, C.green
pasuperct · 2021 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024Commonwealth v. Snyder, 289 A.3d 1121, 1126 (Pa.Super. 2023) (finding an excessive sentence claim coupled with a claim of disregard for appellant's “rehabilitative potential” - 25 - J-A26019-23 raises a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Crawford, 254 A.3d 769, 782 (Pa.Super. 2021) (stating that a claim that the sentencing court relied on improper factors raises a substantial question).

11
Com. v. Snyder, D.green
pasuperct · 2023 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024Commonwealth v. Snyder, 289 A.3d 1121, 1126 (Pa.Super. 2023) (finding an excessive sentence claim coupled with a claim of disregard for appellant's “rehabilitative potential” - 25 - J-A26019-23 raises a substantial question); Commonwealth v. Crawford, 254 A.3d 769, 782 (Pa.Super. 2021) (stating that a claim that the sentencing court relied on improper factors raises a substantial question).

11
Commonwealth v. Lamondagreen
pasuperct · 2012 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020See Lamonda, 52 A.3d at 371 ; Roden, 730 A.2d at 997 .

11
Commonwealth v. Leatherbygreen
pasuperct · 2015 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Commonwealth v. Leatherby, 116 A.3d 73, 83 (Pa. Super. 2015).

11
Commonwealth v. Stewartgreen
pasuperct · 2005 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016See Stewart, supra. Therefore, we review the merits of the sentencing issue.2 Our standard of review concerning the discretionary aspects of sentencing is as follows: Sentencing is a matter vested in the sound discretion of the sentencing judge, and a sentence will not be disturbed on appeal absent a manifest abuse of discretion.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Com. v. Sexton, S. green
pasuperct · 2019
1 sentence

2026Id.

12026–2026
Commonwealth v. Roden green
pasuperct · 1999
1 sentence

2020See Lamonda, 52 A.3d at 371 ; Roden, 730 A.2d at 997 .

12020–2020

Statutes the citing opinions construe

PA § 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9721 (5)

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.

Where else courts name it

PA 8 (2016–2026) CA 3 (1996–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check