Commonwealth v. Rice

How courts have described this case

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

• where trial court’s “conclusions are logical and supported by evidence of record” then it “did not commit a palpable abuse of discretion” by rejecting weight claim
• where trial court’s “conclusions are logical and supported by evidence of record,” it then “did not commit a palpable abuse of discretion” by rejecting a weight claim
• where trial court’s “conclusions are logical and supported by evidence of record” then it “did not commit a palpable abuse of discretion” by rejecting a weight claim
• where trial court’s “conclusions are logical and supported by evidence of record” then it “did not commit a palpable abuse of discretion” by rejecting a weight claim
• where trial court’s “conclusions are logical and supported by evidence of record” then it “did not commit a palpable abuse of discretion” by rejecting a weight claim
• where trial court’s “conclusions are logical and supported by evidence of record” then it “did not commit a palpable abuse of discretion” by rejecting a weight claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Champney
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-09-24· cited 563×
• Commonwealth v. Kim
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2005-11-15· cited 68×
• Commonwealth v. Walker
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2005-06-29· cited 37×
• In re D.D.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1991-09-24· cited 19×