Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Mitchell

Citations

  • 632 A.2d 934
  • 429 Pa. Super. 435
  • 1993 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3651

How courts have described this case

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

  • clarifying that “an appeal of a parole revocation is not an appeal of the discretionary aspects of sentence.”
  • explaining technical violations of parole conditions can justify revocation of parole
  • explaining technical violations of parole conditions can justify revocation of parole
  • court has no authority to order new sentence with minimum and maximum when revoking parole
  • “an appeal of a parole revocation is not an appeal of the discretionary aspects of sentence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cavanaugh, Kelly, Montgomery

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 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.