Commonwealth v. Dixon

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that, following a trial de novo in a summary case, Pa.R.Crim.P. 720(D) precludes the filing of a post-sentence motion
• recognizing that Rule 720(D) prohibits filing of post-sentence motion following a trial de novo
• finding that the appellant’s absence was voluntary where he ignored directions printed on his court papers and reported to the wrong location
• affirming trial court’s dismissal of summary appeal where defendant ignored instructions on court papers and did not appear at correct location for hearing
• cause requires a showing “that the circumstances causing [the defendant’s] absence were beyond his control”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Disalvo
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2013-07-12· cited 307×
• Commonwealth v. Rodriguez
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2013-11-22· cited 49×
• Commonwealth v. Peralta
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-10-31· cited 6×
• Com. v. Heyboer, M.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2022-07-26
• Com. v. Wagner, J.L., Jr.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2026-06-25

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Diamond
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2008-03-20· cited 87×
• Commonwealth v. Marizzaldi
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2002-12-20· cited 46×
• Commonwealth v. Eyiwunmi Akinsanmi
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2012-10-17· cited 26×
• Commonwealth v. Askins
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-10-18· cited 21×
• Commonwealth v. Doleno
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1991-07-10· cited 17×
• Commonwealth v. Mesler
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1999-05-20· cited 13×