Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 9/12/2003

Commonwealth v. Wright

Citations

832 A.2d 1104
2003 Pa. Super. 344
2003 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2920

How courts have described this case

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

finding that the evidence \plainly satisfies the standard for sufficiency\ for a conviction of aggravated assault and recklessly endangering another person where the appellant's testimony about the shooting contradicted that of the victim's and two eye-witnesses
finding counsel had a reasonable basis in not moving to suppress the appellant’s statement when its admission would allow -6- J-S78032-18 the jury to hear the appellant’s explanation for his conduct without having the appellant testify and be subject to cross-examination
“In imposing a sentence, the trial judge may determine whether, given the facts of a particular case, a sentence should run consecutive to or concurrent with another sentence being imposed.”
“[Wright’s] claim here, that consecutive sentences are too harsh, is little more than a bald claim of excessiveness. [Wright] simply has not raised a substantial question and so is not entitled to review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Del Sole, P.J., Graci and Beck

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

17 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.