Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9774 (2026)
Revocation of State intermediate punishment sentence (Repealed).
✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
PA-LEGpalegis.us
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 9774. Revocation of State intermediate punishment sentence (Repealed).
2019 Repeal. Section 9774 was repealed December 18, 2019, P.L.776, No.115, effective immediately.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1998–2022 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Kuykendall, 2 A.3d 559 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010).
Commonwealth v. Kuykendall, 2 A.3d 559 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010). “(3)The court shall schedule a prompt State intermediate punishment revocation hearing pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 (relating to revocation of State intermediate punishment sentence).”
Commonwealth v. Mazzetti, 44 A.3d 58 (Pa. 2012). “[8] Correspondingly, section 9763(d) *67 provides that following a violation of a condition of county intermediate punishment, "the attorney for the Commonwealth may file notice at any time prior to resentencing of the Commonwealth's intention to proceed under an applicable…”
Commonwealth v. Flowers, 149 A.3d 867 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774(c). Appellant concedes that he was expelled from the SIP program, N.”
Com. v. Schultz, Jr., P., 116 A.3d 1116 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015). “(8) The court shall schedule a prompt State intermediate punishment revocation hearing pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 (relating to revocation of State intermediate punishment sentence).”
Com. v. Williams, D., 263 A.3d 1, 2021 PA Super 173 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2021). “(3) The court shall schedule a prompt State intermediate punishment revocation hearing pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 (relating to revocation of State intermediate punishment sentence) [(now repealed)].”
Beahm v. Burke, 982 F. Supp. 2d 451 (E.D. Pa. 2013). “§ 9773, or state immediate punishment sentence, 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774. . To establish § 1983 liability in this context, a plaintiff must first demonstrate: 1) a prison official's knowledge of the prisoner's problem and the risk that unwarranted punishment was being inflicted; 2)…”
Com. v. Anderson, D., No. 805 MDA 2021 (Pa. Super. Ct. Jan. 13, 2022). “Did not the lower court lack the legal authority to revoke [Appellant’s] state intermediate punishment (“SIP”) sentence at count 1 and to impose a new sentence because the statutory basis for revocation of SIP – 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 – was repealed by legislation enacted on December…”
Com. v. Rice, C., No. 1420 WDA 2016 (Pa. Super. Ct. July 31, 2017). “After noting the guideline ranges for the two felony offenses and Appellant’s ____________________________________________ 4 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 provides: (a) General rule.”
Com. v. Boreman, D., No. 1469 MDA 2015 (Pa. Super. Ct. Aug. 29, 2016). “42 Pa.C.S. § 9774. Accordingly, if a court revokes a defendant’s SIP sentence, it must re-sentence him.”
Com. v. Heinbach, W., No. 1145 MDA 2016 (Pa. Super. Ct. Jan. 4, 2017). “42 Pa.C.S. § 9774. Additionally, Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 708 provides, in relevant part: -3- J-S94036-16 Whenever a defendant has been sentenced to probation or intermediate punishment, or placed on parole, the judge shall not revoke such probation, intermediate…”
Com. v. Broody, J., No. 1921 MDA 2016 (Pa. Super. Ct. Aug. 17, 2017). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774(c). Here, the trial court imposed a sentence in the standard range of the Sentencing Guidelines on each conviction, but ran the terms consecutively to one another.”
Com. v. Wagner, V., No. 775 MDA 2018 (Pa. Super. Ct. Feb. 27, 2019). “…available to the court shall be the same as the alternatives available at the time of the initial sentencing.” 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774(b)-(c). -8-”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9774(b): 2 cases
Commonwealth v. Kuykendall, 2 A.3d 559 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010). “(3)The court shall schedule a prompt State intermediate punishment revocation hearing pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 (relating to revocation of State intermediate punishment sentence).”
Com. v. Wagner, V., No. 775 MDA 2018 (Pa. Super. Ct. Feb. 27, 2019). “…available to the court shall be the same as the alternatives available at the time of the initial sentencing.” 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774(b)-(c). -8-”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9774(c): 7 cases
Commonwealth v. Flowers, 149 A.3d 867 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774(c). Appellant concedes that he was expelled from the SIP program, N.”
Commonwealth v. Mazzetti, 44 A.3d 58 (Pa. 2012). “[8] Correspondingly, section 9763(d) *67 provides that following a violation of a condition of county intermediate punishment, "the attorney for the Commonwealth may file notice at any time prior to resentencing of the Commonwealth's intention to proceed under an applicable…”
Commonwealth v. Kuykendall, 2 A.3d 559 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010). “(3)The court shall schedule a prompt State intermediate punishment revocation hearing pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 (relating to revocation of State intermediate punishment sentence).”
Com. v. Rice, C., No. 1420 WDA 2016 (Pa. Super. Ct. July 31, 2017). “After noting the guideline ranges for the two felony offenses and Appellant’s ____________________________________________ 4 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774 provides: (a) General rule.”
Com. v. Broody, J., No. 1921 MDA 2016 (Pa. Super. Ct. Aug. 17, 2017). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 9774(c). Here, the trial court imposed a sentence in the standard range of the Sentencing Guidelines on each conviction, but ran the terms consecutively to one another.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.