7 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Oreegreen2 sentences2020See Commonwealth v. Oree, 911 A.2d 169, 173 (Pa. Super. 2006). 2020See Commonwealth v. Oree, 911 A.2d 169, 173 (Pa. Super. 2006). | 2 | 2 |
Com. v. Risoldi, C.green2 sentences2026“A challenge to the trial court’s authority to impose a sentence of restitution based on its finding that the restitution was a direct result of the criminal conduct is a challenge to the legality of the sentence.” Commonwealth v. Risoldi, 238 A.3d 434 , 460 n.23 (Pa. Super. 2020) (citation omitted). 2025See Appellant’s Brief, at 29-30; Commonwealth v. Risoldi, 238 A.3d 434 , 461 n.23 (Pa. Super. 2020) (“A challenge to the trial court's authority to impose a sentence of restitution based on its finding that the restitution was a direct result of the criminal conduct is a challenge to the legality of the sentence.”) (citation omitted). - 12 - J-A14004-25 the legality of a sentence, our standard of review is de novo and our scope of review is plenary. | 1 | 4 |
Com. v. Royal, H.green1 sentence2025“A challenge to the trial court's authority to impose a sentence of restitution based on its finding that the restitution was a direct result of the criminal conduct is a challenge to the legality of the sentence.” Commonwealth v. Risoldi, 238 A.3d 434 , 461 n.23 (Pa. Super. 2020) (citation omitted). ____________________________________________ 5 While an allegation that restitution is speculative is typically raised in the context of a challenge to the amount of restitution, see Commonwealth v. Royal, 312 A.3d 317, 325 (Pa. Super. 2024), Zions does not allege that the amount of restitution im | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Owensgreen2 sentences1996The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution “prohibits the Commonwealth from punishing an accused twice for the same offense.” Commonwealth v. Owens, 437 Pa.Super. 64, 80 , 649 A.2d 129, 137 (1994), citing Commonwealth v. Walker, 468 Pa. 323, 331 , 362 A.2d 227, 231 (1976). 1996The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution “prohibits the Commonwealth from punishing an accused twice for the same offense.” Commonwealth v. Owens, 437 Pa.Super. 64, 80 , 649 A.2d 129, 137 (1994), citing Commonwealth v. Walker, 468 Pa. 323, 331 , 362 A.2d 227, 231 (1976). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Walkergreen2 sentences1996The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution “prohibits the Commonwealth from punishing an accused twice for the same offense.” Commonwealth v. Owens, 437 Pa.Super. 64, 80 , 649 A.2d 129, 137 (1994), citing Commonwealth v. Walker, 468 Pa. 323, 331 , 362 A.2d 227, 231 (1976). 1996The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution “prohibits the Commonwealth from punishing an accused twice for the same offense.” Commonwealth v. Owens, 437 Pa.Super. 64, 80 , 649 A.2d 129, 137 (1994), citing Commonwealth v. Walker, 468 Pa. 323, 331 , 362 A.2d 227, 231 (1976). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.