Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Smith

Citations

  • 575 A.2d 150
  • 394 Pa. Super. 164
  • 1990 Pa. Super. LEXIS 973

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding the claim that the sentence \` was so manifestly excessive as to constitute an abuse of discretion where the defendant received asentence at the top of the aggravated range of the sentencing guidelines [j\' did not raise asubstantial question
  • arguments concerning weight trial court gave to legitimate sentencing factors did not raise a substantial question entitling defendant to appellate review of discretionary aspects of sentence
  • arguments concerning weight trial court gave to legitimate sentencing factors did not raise a substantial question entitling defendant to appellate review of discretionary aspects of sentence
  • challenge to weight given sentencing factors does not raise substantial question
  • challenge to weight given sentencing factors does not raise substantial question

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rowley, Olszewski, Tamilia

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 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.