Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 11/18/2016

Commonwealth v. Hicks

Citations

151 A.3d 216
2016 Pa. Super. 257
2016 Pa. Super. LEXIS 675

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that a claim that the sentencing court failed to set forth adequate reasons for the sentence imposed raises a substantial question
holding that a trial judge has discretion in juvenile resentencing cases to depart from the applicable minimums relative to offenses committed on or after June 24, 2012
stating that a claim that sentencing court failed to set forth its reasons for the sentence raises a substantial question
noting vacation of one sentence disrupted sentencing scheme, consequently Court vacated all sentences and directed trial court to start afresh on remand
explaining where trial court errs in its sentence in multi-count case, we will vacate entire sentence to allow trial court to re-structure its sentencing plan
explaining where trial court errs in its sentence in multi-count case, we will vacate entire sentence to allow trial court to re-structure its sentencing plan

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Elliott, Shogan, Strassburger

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.