Com. v. Melendez-Negron, J., Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that Commonwealth and defendant both entitled to benefit of plea bargain
• holding the mandatory minimum sentencing scheme set forth in Section 9712.1 and under which the appellant had been sentenced was unconstitutional in light of Alleyne
• establishing that without the Commonwealth’s consent, a court cannot later modify the terms of a plea agreement as it would “deny the Commonwealth the full benefit of the agreement which it reached”
• vacating the appellant’s guilty plea because it included a mandatory minimum sentence under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9712.1 for firearms possession
• vacating illegal sentence and guilty plea when “shared misapprehension that the mandatory minimum sentence . . . applied . . . tainted the parties’ negotiations at the outset”
• vacating guilty plea and remanding for further proceedings; agreeing with PCRA petitioner that a “shared misapprehension that the mandatory minimum sentence . . . applied” tainted the parties’ negotiations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).