Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Alston

Citations

  • 212 A.3d 526

How courts have described this case

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

  • “A challenge to the legality of sentence is a question of law; our standard of review is de novo and our scope of review is plenary.”
  • registration requirements implicate legality of sentence, to which this Court applies de novo standard of review
  • “A challenge to the legality of sentence is a question of law; our standard of review is de novo and our scope of review is plenary.”
  • “[W]here [a]ppellant’s offenses straddle the operative dates for Subchapters H and I[,]” he is entitled to the lower punishment found in Subsection I if there is not a “specific finding by the chosen factfinder of when the offenses occurred.”
  • “[W]hen an appellant’s offenses straddle the effective dates of Subchapters H and I of SORNA, he is entitled to the lower reporting requirements of Subchapter I, absent a specific finding of when the offenses related to the convictions actually occurred”
  • remanding for new notification of registration requirements

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gantman, Lazarus, Ott

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.