Commonwealth v. Wolfe

How courts have described this case

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

• claim that counsel ineffective with regard to discretionary aspects of sentencing not cognizable under PCRA
• PCRA petitioner’s challenges to prior counsel’s stewardship were not cognizable as they related to counsel’s actions in connection with sentencing issues, which do not implicate the truth-determining process
• relying on the language of Section 9543(a)(2)(h

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Jordan
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2001-04-11· cited 241×
• Commonwealth v. Watson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-10-31· cited 211×
• Commonwealth v. Hernandez
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-05-22· cited 43×
• Commonwealth v. Wolfe
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-04-15· cited 34×
• Commonwealth v. Lassen
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1995-05-16· cited 29×
• Commonwealth v. Bronaugh
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1995-11-28· cited 28×
• Commonwealth v. Grier
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1991-11-20· cited 23×
• Commonwealth v. Lewis
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1993-12-02· cited 22×
• Commonwealth v. Dukeman
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-03-26· cited 21×
• Commonwealth v. Patterson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1997-01-27· cited 16×
• Commonwealth v. Korb
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-10-14· cited 13×
• Commonwealth v. Hickman
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1994-07-11· cited 12×
• Commonwealth v. Ginglardi
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-08-04· cited 12×
• Commonwealth v. Edwards
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-08-25· cited 8×
• Commonwealth v. Moore
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1995-01-20· cited 5×
• Com. v. Stultz, J.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2015-04-28
• Commonwealth v. Glass
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-04-02