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.
6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2014–2026 1 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. Masongreen2 sentences2020Id. at 254 . 2020See id. at 254 , citing Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 805 (1984) (where police forcefully entered a dwelling without a warrant and observed contraband in plain view, suppression of the contraband not required where it was later seized pursuant to a warrant obtained based on information which had nothing to do with the warrantless entry; “it is clear from our prior holdings that ‘the exclusionary rule has no application [where] the Government learned of the evidence ‘from an independent source.’’”) (quoting Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 487 (1963)). | 1 | 2 |
Thompson, T. v. Thompson, A.green1 sentence2026“The law is clear that an indefinitely suspended sentence is not a sentencing alternative and is illegal. ‘It is the uncertainty surrounding such sentences, and the disorder they can engender, that prompts their prohibition.’” Thompson v. Thompson, 187 A.3d 259, 264 (Pa. Super. 2018) (“Thompson I”) (citations omitted), affirmed, Thompson II, 223 A.3d 1272 . ____________________________________________ 8 As noted above, Mason did not appeal from the adjudication of contempt, which carried the sentence in dispute. | 1 | 1 |
Orfield v. Weindelgreen1 sentence2026See Orfield, 52 A.3d at 278 . | 1 | 1 |
Segura v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2020See id. at 254 , citing Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 805 (1984) (where police forcefully entered a dwelling without a warrant and observed contraband in plain view, suppression of the contraband not required where it was later seized pursuant to a warrant obtained based on information which had nothing to do with the warrantless entry; “it is clear from our prior holdings that ‘the exclusionary rule has no application [where] the Government learned of the evidence ‘from an independent source.’’”) (quoting Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 487 (1963)). | 1 | 1 |
Wong Sun v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2020See id. at 254 , citing Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 805 (1984) (where police forcefully entered a dwelling without a warrant and observed contraband in plain view, suppression of the contraband not required where it was later seized pursuant to a warrant obtained based on information which had nothing to do with the warrantless entry; “it is clear from our prior holdings that ‘the exclusionary rule has no application [where] the Government learned of the evidence ‘from an independent source.’’”) (quoting Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 487 (1963)). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Woodardgreen1 sentence2019See Commonwealth v. Woodard, 136 A.3d 1003 (Pa. Super. 2016) (ruling on a motion to join informations is not reviewable under Rule 311(d) because it had no effect on the Commonwealth’s ability to prosecute); Commonwealth v. Smith, 544 A.2d 943, 945 (Pa. 1988) (holding that severance of two informations was not reviewable under Rule 311(d)). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Smithgreen1 sentence2019See Commonwealth v. Woodard, 136 A.3d 1003 (Pa. Super. 2016) (ruling on a motion to join informations is not reviewable under Rule 311(d) because it had no effect on the Commonwealth’s ability to prosecute); Commonwealth v. Smith, 544 A.2d 943, 945 (Pa. 1988) (holding that severance of two informations was not reviewable under Rule 311(d)). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Mason, L., Apltgreen1 sentence2018See Mason, 130 A.3d 601, 630 (rejecting as meritless Mason’s claim regarding a heat of passion defense based upon the “stormy relationship” he had with the victim; even considering the other evidence proffered by Mason but not used at trial, “it was not unreasonable for counsel to forgo attempting to persuade the jury that [Mason] acted in the heat of passion”). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2014We may affirm a trial court’s decision regarding a motion to suppress on any ground, “even where those grounds were not suggested to or known by the trial court.” Commonwealth v. Gatlos, 76 A.3d 44 , 62 n.14 (Pa. Super. 2013); see also Thompson, 93 A.3d at 484 (we are not bound by the trial court’s legal conclusions, but must apply the law to the supported facts found by the trial court). 2014“Our standard of review in addressing a challenge to the denial of a suppression motion is limited to determining whether the suppression court’s factual findings are supported by the record and whether the legal conclusions drawn from those facts are correct.” Commonwealth v. -3- J-A23003-14 Thompson, 93 A.3d 478, 484 (Pa. Super. 2014) (citation omitted). | 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. Clark
green
1 sentence2018In short, VanDivner did not demonstrate that the “alternatives not chosen offered a potential for success substantially greater than the tactics utilized.” Commonwealth v. Clark, supra. - 22 - J-S50036-18 Finally, again, VanDivner cannot establish prejudice in this claim. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Commonwealth v. Gatlos
green
1 sentence2014We may affirm a trial court’s decision regarding a motion to suppress on any ground, “even where those grounds were not suggested to or known by the trial court.” Commonwealth v. Gatlos, 76 A.3d 44 , 62 n.14 (Pa. Super. 2013); see also Thompson, 93 A.3d at 484 (we are not bound by the trial court’s legal conclusions, but must apply the law to the supported facts found by the trial court). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
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.