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 1979–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Banksgreen1 sentence2022First, the PCRA court “must determine whether the [Petitioner’s] PCRA petition raises a material issue of fact concerning whether he was competent at the time of trial such that he would be entitled to a hearing on the claim.” Id. (citing Pa.R.Crim.P. 908(A)(2) (pertaining to PCRA hearings), Commonwealth v. Banks, 656 A.2d 467, 473 (Pa. 1995) (noting that where there are no disputed factual issues, a PCRA hearing is not necessary)). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Renfroe, Adam O., Jr.green2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). 10 At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant’s competency at trial is raised in | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Marshallgreen2 sentences2004See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Johnson, 490 Pa. 312 , 416 A.2d 485, 487 (1980) (court held a retrospective hearing on whether defendant was competent to stand trial; court determined, via the testimony of trial counsel and appellant, that appellant understood the nature of the trial proceedings); Commonwealth v. Marshall, 456 Pa. 313 , 318 A.2d 724, 726 (1974) (remand to the trial court to hold a retrospective hearing to determine whether defendant was competent to stand trial). 2004See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Johnson, 490 Pa. 312 , 416 A.2d 485, 487 (1980) (court held a retrospective hearing on whether defendant was competent to stand trial; court determined, via the testimony of trial counsel and appellant, that appellant understood the nature of the trial proceedings); Commonwealth v. Marshall, 456 Pa. 313 , 318 A.2d 724, 726 (1974) (remand to the trial court to hold a retrospective hearing to determine whether defendant was competent to stand trial). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Johnsongreen2 sentences2004See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Johnson, 490 Pa. 312 , 416 A.2d 485, 487 (1980) (court held a retrospective hearing on whether defendant was competent to stand trial; court determined, via the testimony of trial counsel and appellant, that appellant understood the nature of the trial proceedings); Commonwealth v. Marshall, 456 Pa. 313 , 318 A.2d 724, 726 (1974) (remand to the trial court to hold a retrospective hearing to determine whether defendant was competent to stand trial). 2004See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Johnson, 490 Pa. 312 , 416 A.2d 485, 487 (1980) (court held a retrospective hearing on whether defendant was competent to stand trial; court determined, via the testimony of trial counsel and appellant, that appellant understood the nature of the trial proceedings); Commonwealth v. Marshall, 456 Pa. 313 , 318 A.2d 724, 726 (1974) (remand to the trial court to hold a retrospective hearing to determine whether defendant was competent to stand trial). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Nerogreen2 sentences1979Commonwealth v. Nero, 250 Pa.Super. 17, 23 , 378 A.2d 430, 433 (1977). 1979Commonwealth v. Nero, 250 Pa.Super. 17, 23 , 378 A.2d 430, 433 (1977). | 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. Santiago
green
2 sentences2022Finally, the Santiago Court stated: “[w]e will not disturb a PCRA court’s ruling as to whether a retrospective hearing should be held absent an abuse of discretion.” Id. at 693-94 . 2022Santiago further explicitly states, “[i]f the trial court finds some other type of evidence helpful in resolving whether a retrospective hearing may be held, the trial court may receive such evidence.” Id. (emphasis added). | 2 | 2022–2022 |
Gold, F. v. Rosen, T.
green
1 sentence2021This retrospective test was employed in Gold v. Rosen, 135 A.3d 1039 , 1044 ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Mitchell
green
2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Willie Reynolds v. Larry Norris, Arkansas Department of Correction
green
2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). 10 At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant’s competency at trial is raised in | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Bostwick
green
2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Snyder
green
2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). 10 At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant’s competency at trial is raised in | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Bryan v. State
green
2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). 10 At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant’s competency at trial is raised in | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised | 1 | 2004–2004 |
United States v. Michael A. S. Makris
green
2 sentences2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). [10] At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant's competency at trial is raised 2004Accord United States v. Renfroe, 825 F.2d 763 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899 (5th Cir.1976); Reynolds v. Norris, 86 F.3d 796 (8th Cir.1996); People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill.2d 312 , 245 Ill.Dec. 1 , 727 N.E.2d 254 (2000); State v. Snyder, 750 So.2d 832 (La.1999); Montana v. Bostwick, 296 Mont. 149 , 988 P.2d 765 (1999); Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338 (Okla.1997); State v. Johnson, 133 Wis.2d 207 , 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986). 10 At this juncture, we must articulate the test as to when a retrospective hearing may be held where the issue of defendant’s competency at trial is raised in | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Commonwealth v. Gravely
green
2 sentences1983Our Supreme Court has similarly given only prospective application to its decisions in Blair and Gravely , because of "the possibility of reliance by counsel on prior decisions of this Court." Commonwealth v. Gravely, supra 486 Pa. at 199 , 404 A.2d at 1298 . 1983Our Supreme Court has similarly given only prospective application to its decisions in Blair and Gravely , because of "the possibility of reliance by counsel on prior decisions of this Court." Commonwealth v. Gravely, supra 486 Pa. at 199 , 404 A.2d at 1298 . | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.