3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 15 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Commonwealth v. Raven.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Commonwealth v. Raven Anchor | green | “this court has held that an excessive sentence claim-in conjunction with an assertion that the court failed to consider mitigating factors-raises a substantial question.” | 9 |
| 2 | Commonwealth v. Gillespie | green | “the clear purpose of 6105 is to protect the public from convicted criminals who possess firearms, regardless of whether the previous crimes were actually violent or the barrel of the firearm was a certain length.” | 3 |
| 3 | Commonwealth v. Raven | green | “his court has held that an excessive sentence claim-in conjunction with an assertion that the court failed to consider mitigating factors-raises a substantial question.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.