D'Agostino v. Jackson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[a] claim that the sentencing court misapplied the Sentencing Guidelines in double counting a prior conviction in its calculation of the prior record score presents a substantial question.”
• explaining that a “challenge to the calculation of the Sentencing Guidelines raises a question of the discretionary aspects of a defendant's sentence.”
• explaining that a “challenge to the calculation of the Sentencing Guidelines raises a question of the -4- J-A17018-19 discretionary aspects of a defendant's sentence.”
• explaining that a “challenge to the calculation of the Sentencing Guidelines raises a question of the discretionary aspects of a defendant’s sentence.” (citations and quotation marks omitted)
• rejecting an appellant’s argument that a prior burglary conviction was an element of persons not to possess firearms
• treating a prior burglary conviction as merely a precondition to a violation of section 6105 that did not change the grading of Keiper’s conviction for possession of a firearm by a prohibited person

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).