Commonwealth v. Young

How courts have described this case

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

• holding restrictive language in statute specifically empowers court to double sentence for subsequent drug conviction; enhancement not applicable to conspiracy conviction attending subsequent drug conviction
• the sentencing enhancement under 35 P.S. § 780-115 does not apply to - 17 - J-A27039-22 conspiracy
• where our disposition upsets the trial court’s sentencing scheme, we must vacate and remand for resentencing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Watson
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2008-02-07· cited 73×
• Commonwealth v. Hoke
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-01-22· cited 37×
• Commonwealth v. Warren
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2014-01-29· cited 34×
• Rivera v. Goode
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2008-03-25· cited 4×

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Turner
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-07-27· cited 4,184×
• Commonwealth v. Finley
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-10-31· cited 4,104×
• Commonwealth v. McClintic
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2006-11-22· cited 137×
• Commonwealth v. Vasquez
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-01-28· cited 113×
• Commonwealth v. Bradley
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-10-28· cited 105×
• Commonwealth v. Aponte
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2004-08-19· cited 104×
• Commonwealth v. Exler
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1914-01-05· cited 88×
• Commonwealth v. Glover
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1959-11-25· cited 83×
• Commonwealth v. Benchoff
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1997-08-19· cited 36×
• Commonwealth v. Adams
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-09-12· cited 20×
• Commonwealth v. McMullen
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-08-17· cited 10×
• Com. v. Young
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2005-05-16· cited 3×