8 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2011–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Com. v. Cramer, R., IIIgreen1 sentence2025See Trial Court Opinion, 5/3/24, at 6; see also Commonwealth v. Cramer, 195 A.3d 594, 602 (Pa. Super. 2018) (reiterating that the uncorroborated testimony of the complaining witness is sufficient to convict a defendant of a sexual offense). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Schillinggreen1 sentence2025The “mere apparent ability to inflict harm is not enough to support a conviction[; rather] an actual danger of harm must be shown.” Commonwealth v. Schilling, 431 A.2d 1088, 1092 (Pa. Super. 1981); see also Commonwealth v. Bishop, 307 A.3d 657 , 1697 MDA 2022, at * 5 (Pa. Super. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Kerstetergreen1 sentence2019“A defendant is permitted to withdraw his guilty plea under the PCRA if ineffective assistance of counsel caused the defendant to enter an involuntary plea of guilty.”4 Commonwealth v. Kersteter, 877 A.2d 466, at 468 (Pa. Super. 2005) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Turetskygreen1 sentence2019See Commonwealth v. Turetsky, 925 A.2d 876, 881 (Pa. Super. 2007) (“[a] person who elects to plead guilty is bound by the statements he makes in open court while under oath and he may not later assert grounds for withdrawing the plea which contradict the statements he made at his plea colloquy.”) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Lincolngreen1 sentence2019Before accepting Rodriguez’s plea, the court, through the use of a Spanish-language interpreter, confirmed Rodriguez’s awareness of the charges to which he was pleading guilty, his understanding of the maximum sentences associated with those charges, and the voluntary nature of his ____________________________________________ 1By entering a negotiated guilty plea, Rodriguez waived his right to “challenge on direct appeal all non-jurisdictional defects except the legality of the sentence and the validity of the plea.” Commonwealth v. Lincoln, 72 A.3d 606, at 609 (Pa. Super. 2013). -2- J-S82012- | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Claytongreen2 sentences2018However, in order to obtain ultimate relief, Rodriguez’s claim must possess - 12 - J-S79019-17 jurisprudence that undeveloped claims are waived and unreviewable on appeal.” Commonwealth v. Clayton, 816 A.2d 217, 221 (Pa. 2002) Nevertheless, we decline to find waiver and proceed to address Rodriguez’s sentencing claim. 2018However, in order to obtain ultimate relief, Rodriguez’s claim must possess - 12 - J-S79019-17 jurisprudence that undeveloped claims are waived and unreviewable on appeal.” Commonwealth v. Clayton, 816 A.2d 217, 221 (Pa. 2002) Nevertheless, we decline to find waiver and proceed to address Rodriguez’s sentencing claim. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Browngreen1 sentence2016See Brown, 23 A.3d at 554 (noting that “[t]he plurality in McCree favored the “Baker/Rodriguez standard . . . allow[ing] warrantless searches where officers” have no particular knowledge regarding the subject vehicle). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Hoover, J.green1 sentence2015“It is well established that the admissibility of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court, and such rulings will not form the basis for appellate relief absent an abuse of discretion.” Commonwealth v. Hoover, 107 A.3d 723, 729 (Pa. 2014) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. McCreegreen2 sentences2011The plurality in McCree favored the Baker/Rodriguez standard, stating that “[w]e have allowed warrantless seizures where police do not have advance knowledge that a particular vehicle carrying evidence of crime would be parked in a particular locale, ... the exigencies of the mobility of the vehicle and of there having been inadequate time and opportunity to obtain a warrant rendered the search [without a warrant] proper.” McCree, 592 Pa. at 252-53 , 924 A.2d at 630 (emphasis in original). 2011The plurality in McCree favored the Baker/Rodriguez standard, stating that “[w]e have allowed warrantless seizures where police do not have advance knowledge that a particular vehicle carrying evidence of crime would be parked in a particular locale, ... the exigencies of the mobility of the vehicle and of there having been inadequate time and opportunity to obtain a warrant rendered the search [without a warrant] proper.” McCree, 592 Pa. at 252-53 , 924 A.2d at 630 (emphasis in original). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Board of Education v. Walter
green
2 sentences2023The Ohio Supreme Court “reject[ed] the ‘Rodriguez test’ [i.e., whether a right to education is explicitly or implicitly guaranteed by the constitution,] for determining which rights are fundamental.” Walter, 390 N.E.2d at 818 .116 The court explained “[w]hile the test may have some applicability in determining which rights are fundamental under the Constitution of the United States, it is not helpful in determining whether a right is fundamental under the Ohio Constitution.” Id. 2023The Ohio Supreme Court “reject[ed] the ‘Rodriguez test’ [i.e., whether a right to education is explicitly or implicitly guaranteed by the constitution,] for determining which rights are fundamental.” Walter, 390 N.E.2d at 818 .116 The court explained “[w]hile the test may have some applicability in determining which rights are fundamental under the Constitution of the United States, it is not helpful in determining whether a right is fundamental under the Ohio Constitution.” Id. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Lujan v. Colorado State Board of Education
green
2 sentences2023Id. 2023In Lujan, the Supreme Court of Colorado reversed the trial court, which had held education was a fundamental right. 119 Similar to the Maryland court in Hornbeck and the Ohio court in Walter, the Colorado court in Lujan rejected the “Rodriguez test,” which involves an inquiry into whether the right is explicitly or implicitly guaranteed by the Constitution, similar to Pennsylvania’s James test.120 Lujan, 649 P.2d at 1017 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Commonwealth v. Spotz
green
1 sentence2019The only cognizable issue presented in the argument section of Rodriguez’s brief is an assertion that “but for the ineffectiveness of his trial counsel, [Rodriguez] would not have entered the negotiated plea and would have proceeded to trial.” Id. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Commonwealth v. Edwards
green
1 sentence2018We further note that the argument portion of Rodriguez’s brief addressing his sentencing claims consists of fewer than 2½ pages and focuses heavily on the absence of a PSI, which he has waived, as well as a case which is inapposite.5 “[I]t is a well settled principle of appellate ____________________________________________ 5Rodriguez cites our decision in Commonwealth v. Edwards, 906 A.2d 1225 (Pa. Super. 2006), and argues that it supports his claim that a maximum sentence of 6.67 times the minimum “raises an issue of arguable merit.” Brief of Appellant, at 14. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
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.