6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2017 0 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. Yatesgreen2 sentences2017Id. at 909 . 2016There is no ‘two for one discount’ in the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, and we will not permit criminals to imply one through distortion of the common law merger doctrine.” Id. at 911 (footnote omitted). | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Williamsgreen2 sentences1987See Commonwealth v. Williams, 344 Pa.Super. 108, 126 , 496 A.2d 31, 41 (1985) (en banc). 1987See Commonwealth v. Williams, 344 Pa.Super. 108, 126 , 496 A.2d 31, 41 (1985) (en banc). | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Campbellgreen2 sentences1987The common law merger doctrine raises a similar jurisdictional defect in the court's power to impose more than one sentence for a single offense. "[M]ultiple sentences for a single criminal act are unlawful and are beyond the power of the trial court," Commonwealth v. Campbell, 351 Pa.Super. *283 at 63, 505 A.2d at 265 (emphasis added); the merger doctrine, like the double jeopardy clause, merely provides a rule of statutory construction for determining how many punishments the legislature has authorized the court to impose for a single criminal act. 1987The common law merger doctrine raises a similar jurisdictional defect in the court’s power to impose more than one sentence for a single offense. “[Mjultiple sentences for a single criminal act are unlawful and are beyond the power of the trial court,” Commonwealth v. Campbell, 351 Pa.Su per. at 63, 505 A.2d at 265 (emphasis added); the merger doctrine, like the double jeopardy clause, merely provides a rule of statutory construction for determining how many punishments the legislature has authorized the court to impose for a single criminal act. | 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. Weakland
green
2 sentences1989However, while this case was pending in this Court, our Supreme Court issued its opinions in Commonwealth v. *287 Leon Williams, 521 Pa. 556 , 559 A.2d 25 (1989) and Commonwealth v. Weakland, 521 Pa. 353 , 555 A.2d 1228 (1989), which specifically overruled our Supreme Court’s prior decision in Commonwealth v. Michael Williams, supra, and significantly altered the common law merger doctrine as applied in Pennsylvania. 1989However, while this case was pending in this Court, our Supreme Court issued its opinions in Commonwealth v. *287 Leon Williams, 521 Pa. 556 , 559 A.2d 25 (1989) and Commonwealth v. Weakland, 521 Pa. 353 , 555 A.2d 1228 (1989), which specifically overruled our Supreme Court’s prior decision in Commonwealth v. Michael Williams, supra, and significantly altered the common law merger doctrine as applied in Pennsylvania. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Commonwealth v. DeSumma
green
1 sentence1989That the rejection of the single act theory by Frisbie and its progeny was left undisturbed by Weakland and Leon Williams is made clear by our Supreme Court’s reliance upon this aspect of its Frisbie decision in its decision in Commonwealth v. DeSumma, — Pa. —, 559 A.2d 521 (1989), which was filed after Weakland and Leon Williams. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Commonwealth v. Williams
green
2 sentences1989However, while this case was pending in this Court, our Supreme Court issued its opinions in Commonwealth v. *287 Leon Williams, 521 Pa. 556 , 559 A.2d 25 (1989) and Commonwealth v. Weakland, 521 Pa. 353 , 555 A.2d 1228 (1989), which specifically overruled our Supreme Court’s prior decision in Commonwealth v. Michael Williams, supra, and significantly altered the common law merger doctrine as applied in Pennsylvania. 1989However, while this case was pending in this Court, our Supreme Court issued its opinions in Commonwealth v. *287 Leon Williams, 521 Pa. 556 , 559 A.2d 25 (1989) and Commonwealth v. Weakland, 521 Pa. 353 , 555 A.2d 1228 (1989), which specifically overruled our Supreme Court’s prior decision in Commonwealth v. Michael Williams, supra, and significantly altered the common law merger doctrine as applied in Pennsylvania. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Commonwealth v. Williams
green
2 sentences1987Our Supreme Court recently addressed the common law merger doctrine in Commonwealth v. Michael Williams, 514 Pa. 124 , 522 A.2d 1095 (1987). 1987Our Supreme Court recently addressed the common law merger doctrine in Commonwealth v. Michael Williams, 514 Pa. 124 , 522 A.2d 1095 (1987). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Harman v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1985IV A Common law merger doctrine Our inquiry has not ended, however, for we have yet to delve into the common law doctrine of merger, which in this State can be traced at least as far back as Harman v. Commonwealth, 12 Serg. & Rawle 69 (Pa. 1824). 1985Thus, there was no double jeopardy violation in sentencing appellant separately for each offense. *123 IV A Common law merger doctrine Our inquiry has not ended, however, for we have yet to delve into the common law doctrine of merger, which in this State can be traced at least as far back as Harman v. Commonwealth, 12 Serg. & Rawle 69 (Pa. 1824). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.