Commonwealth v. Liscinsky

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the sentencing order contained a “clerical” error subject to correction, as it did not reflect that the trial court specifically stated at sentencing that the sentence it imposed was effective on expiration of defendant’s federal sentence
• explaining that the sentencing order contained a “clerical” error subject to correction, as it did not reflect that the trial court specifically stated at sentencing that the sentence it imposed was effective on expiration of defendant's federal sentence
• explaining that the sentencing order contained a “clerical” error subject to correction, as it did not reflect that the trial court specifically stated at sentencing that the sentence it imposed was effective on expiration of defendant’s federal sentence
• explaining that the sentencing order contained a “clerical” error subject to correction, as it did not reflect that the trial court specifically stated at sentencing that the sentence it imposed was effective on expiration of defendant's federal sentence
• validating a trial court’s authority to correct clerical errors in docket entries at any tmie
• “... in the interest of orderly administration of justice, [the second sovereign should] ... postpone exercise of its jurisdiction by not taking the defendant into custody until the first sovereign has exhausted its remedy against him.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).