Charest v. Mastrandrea

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an allegation that a sentence violates a fundamental norm underlying the sentencing process raises a substantial question
• concluding that a claim regarding a trial court’s failure to consider relevant sentencing criteria, including the protection of the public, the gravity of the underlying offense, and the rehabilitative needs of the appellant raises a substantial question
• concluding that Riggs raised a substantial question by arguing “that the trial court failed to consider relevant sentencing criteria, including the protection of the public, the gravity of the underlying offense and [Rigg’s] rehabilitative needs[], as 42 Pa.C.S.A § 9721(b
• holding an allegation that a sentence fails to consider relevant sentencing criteria violates a fundamental norm underlying the sentencing process and raises a substantial question
• holding substantial question was raised by claim that the court failed to consider all § 9721(b) factors and only focused on one
• noting that failure to consider factors of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9721(b), and instead focusing on complaining victims raised a substantial question

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).