Futterman v. Gerber

How courts have described this case

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

• stating, the operative consideration in a merger analysis is “whether the elements of the offenses are the same or different
• stating, the operative consideration in a merger analysis is “whether the elements of the offenses are the same or different
• stating, the operative consideration in a merger analysis is “whether the elements of the offenses are the same or different”
• where this Court determined that Indecent Assault and Aggravated Indecent Assault are not greater and lesser- included offenses; therefore, merger of convictions of those offenses for sentencing purposes was not appropriate
• “The trial court did not order Appellant to file a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) statement of matters complained of on appeal. Appellant did not file a Rule 1925(b) statement. On January 7, 2004, the trial court filed its Rule 1925(a) opinion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).