Commonwealth v. Vicens-Rodriguez

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that the standard “false in one, false in all” charge is of questionable necessity and holding that failure to give the charge is not reversible error where the overall charge accurately instructs the jury “to consider all relevant factors in considering credibility”
• when a full and complete charge is given on how a jury is to assess the credibility of witnesses, there is no reversible error when a court fails to give the false in one/false in all instruction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Munchinski v. Wilson
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2011-08-05· cited 19×
• Com. v. Reyes, T.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2025-12-22· cited 1×

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Maute
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-12-07· cited 61×
• Commonwealth v. Orlowski
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-09-07· cited 36×
• Burns v. Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Co.
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1986-06-09· cited 34×
• Commonwealth v. Levenson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1980-09-12· cited 31×
• Commonwealth v. Carey
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1981-12-18· cited 29×
• Commonwealth v. Parente
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1957-06-11· cited 26×
• Commonwealth v. Linder
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1981-02-06· cited 21×
• Commonwealth v. Ieradi
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1906-06-27· cited 13×
• Miller v. Stem
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1849-12-15· cited 5×