Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Williams

Citations

  • 198 A.3d 1181

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the defendant’s stipulation in his plea agreement, that the Commonwealth would be substantially prejudiced if he attempted to withdraw, was binding
  • explaining that failure to preserve challenge to discretionary aspects of sentencing orally or in written post-sentence motion waives issue on appeal
  • observing that “a post-sentence motion only preserves challenges to the discretionary aspects of sentencing that are specifically included in the post- sentence motion.”
  • stating that “the trial court should grant it unless it would substantially prejudice the Commonwealth.”
  • “it is well-settled that a post-sentence motion only preserves challenges to the discretionary aspects of sentencing that are specifically included in the post-sentence motion”
  • record showed that defendant’s DNA was found in rape kit samples taken from victim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Panella, Olson, McLaughlin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 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.