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.
7 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2015–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Miller v. Alabamagreen2 sentences2022Here, Appellant’s challenge to his original judgment of sentence, as set forth in his sixth PCRA petition, was based upon the fact that his life-without-parole sentence had been declared unconstitutional by Miller, supra, because Appellant was a juvenile at the time the crimes were committed, and the Miller constitutional ban on mandatory life-without-parole sentences was held to apply retroactively to sentences such as Appellant’s by Montgomery, supra. Appellant’s Miller/Montgomery claim did not challenge the validity of his underlying conviction, only that his mandatory life-without-parole s 2017See Miller, supra (juvenile convicted of homicide offense cannot be sentenced to life in prison without parole absent consideration of juvenile’s special circumstances in light of principles and purposes of juvenile sentencing). -4- J-S52017-17 However, in Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that although Alleyne establishes a new rule of federal constitutional law, it does not apply retroactively to cases pending on collateral review. | 1 | 2 |
Jones v. Mississippigreen2 sentences2021Instead, the Court pointedly opined that Montgomery’s analysis was “in tension with the Court’s retroactivity precedents” and instructed courts not to rely on Montgomery to determine “whether rules other than Miller are substantive.” Jones 141 S.Ct. at 1317 n.4. 2021See id. at 1317 n.4 (stating that “to the extent that Montgomery’s application of the Teague standard is in tension with the Court’s retroactivity precedents that both pre-date and post-date Montgomery, those retroactivity precedents - and not Montgomery - must guide the determination of whether rules other than Miller are substantive”). | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Secretigreen1 sentence2019Commonwealth v. Secreti, 134 A.3d 77, 82 (Pa. Super. 2016). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Washington, T., Aplt.green1 sentence2017See Miller, supra (juvenile convicted of homicide offense cannot be sentenced to life in prison without parole absent consideration of juvenile’s special circumstances in light of principles and purposes of juvenile sentencing). -4- J-S52017-17 However, in Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that although Alleyne establishes a new rule of federal constitutional law, it does not apply retroactively to cases pending on collateral review. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Malovichgreen1 sentence2015Commonwealth v. Malovich, 903 A.2d 1247, 1250 (Pa. Super. 2006). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Montgomery v. Louisiana
green
1 sentence2022Here, Appellant’s challenge to his original judgment of sentence, as set forth in his sixth PCRA petition, was based upon the fact that his life-without-parole sentence had been declared unconstitutional by Miller, supra, because Appellant was a juvenile at the time the crimes were committed, and the Miller constitutional ban on mandatory life-without-parole sentences was held to apply retroactively to sentences such as Appellant’s by Montgomery, supra. Appellant’s Miller/Montgomery claim did not challenge the validity of his underlying conviction, only that his mandatory life-without-parole s | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Commonwealth v. Batts, Q., Aplt.
red
2 sentences2020On January 4, 2019, the PCRA court granted Appellant’s request to consider his December 18, 2018 petition nunc pro tunc.7 On April 8, 2019, the PCRA court granted Appellant’s December 18, 2018 PCRA petition, vacated his 1977 LWOP sentence, and held a resentencing hearing in accordance with Commonwealth v. Batts (Batts II), 163 A.3d 410 (Pa. 2017).8 After hearing the arguments of counsel and 7 For the reasons discussed at length infra, the court lacked jurisdiction to consider the PCRA petition. 8 In Batts II, our Supreme Court held that in resentencing a juvenile defendant convicted of first-d 2020On January 4, 2019, the PCRA court granted Appellant’s request to consider his December 18, 2018 petition nunc pro tunc.7 On April 8, 2019, the PCRA court granted Appellant’s December 18, 2018 PCRA petition, vacated his 1977 LWOP sentence, and held a resentencing hearing in accordance with Commonwealth v. Batts (Batts II), 163 A.3d 410 (Pa. 2017).8 After hearing the arguments of counsel and 7 For the reasons discussed at length infra, the court lacked jurisdiction to consider the PCRA petition. 8 In Batts II, our Supreme Court held that in resentencing a juvenile defendant convicted of first-d | 1 | 2020–2020 |
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.
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.