Commonwealth v. Ressler

How courts have described this case

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

• it is not the intention of Rule 1100 to benefit a defendant who fails to live up to the requirement of bail
• it is not the intention of Rule 1100 to benefit a defendant who fails to live up to the requirement of bail
• “[I]t is not the intention of Rule 1100 to benefit a defendant who fails to live up to the requirements of bail.”
• forty-nine day continuance resulting from defendant’s failure to appear excludable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Bond
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1986-01-31· cited 22×
• Commonwealth v. Gorham
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-04-19· cited 10×
• Commonwealth v. Purnell
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1986-10-27· cited 8×
• Commonwealth v. Bennett
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1983-10-14· cited 7×
• Commonwealth v. Taylor
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-03-08· cited 6×
• Commonwealth v. Haynes
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-01-04· cited 6×

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Hamilton
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1972-11-22· cited 220×
• Commonwealth v. Mitchell
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1977-04-28· cited 191×
• Commonwealth v. Cohen
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1978-10-05· cited 76×
• Commonwealth v. Morgan
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1979-03-14· cited 59×
• Commonwealth v. McCafferty
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1976-09-27· cited 40×
• Commonwealth v. Santiago
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1978-01-26· cited 30×
• Commonwealth v. Goodman
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1978-11-14· cited 15×
• Commonwealth v. Wade
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1976-04-22· cited 12×
• Commonwealth v. Johnson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1979-04-12· cited 4×