Commonwealth v. Perez

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that chemist can analyze two randomly selected packets from group of twenty-two for purposes of determining if all seized items contained controlled substance
• random testing of 5 out of 5,000 tablets sufficient to find appellant guilty of selling over 200 grams of methaqualone
• weight of the mixture containing cocaine, rather than weight of the pure cocaine contained therein, triggers application of mandatory sentencing under 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508(a)(3)
• weight of the mixture containing cocaine, rather than weight of the pure cocaine contained therein, triggers application of mandatory sentencing under 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508(a)(3)
• extrapolation of weight from samplings sufficient to prove weight
• extrapolation of weight from samplings sufficient to prove weight

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Caldera
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1992-07-20· cited 39×
• Commonwealth v. Johnson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-03-12· cited 36×
• Commonwealth v. Corporan
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-06-17· cited 33×
• Commonwealth v. Crowley
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-04-06· cited 19×
• Commonwealth v. Jones
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-04-03· cited 18×
• Commonwealth v. Harley
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-05-25· cited 17×
• Commonwealth v. Carpio-Santiago
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2011-01-24· cited 12×
• Commonwealth v. Lawson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1996-02-16· cited 5×
• Commonwealth v. Lawson
  Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas· 1995-03-02