Commonwealth v. Rodda

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that assertion that trial court failed to sufficiently state its reasons for imposing sentence outside sentencing guidelines raises substantial question
• concluding that where court imposes sentence outside sentencing guidelines, it need not recite numeric range of sentences within guidelines so long as record demonstrates court’s recognition of applicable sentencing range and deviation of sentence from that range
• holding record must demonstrate “with clarity that the court considered the sentencing guidelines in a rational and systematic way and made a dispassionate decision to depart from them”
• holding record must demonstrate “with clarity that the court considered the sentencing guidelines in a rational and systematic way and made a dispassionate decision to depart from them”
• stating that when an appellant asserts that the trial court failed to state sufficiently its reasons for imposing a sentence outside of the Sentencing Guidelines, this Court will conclude that the appellant has stated a substantial question
• providing that generally, this Court will vacate a sentence based on an incorrect or absent guideline recitation upon a showing that the trial court was guided in its sentencing decision by a material misapprehension of the applicable sentencing guideline range

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).