Summary
holding parking lot adjacent to apartment building constituted trafficway for purposes of DUI statute
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. LeesOpinion
1996
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Petitions for Allowance of Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jan 1, 1996
544 Pa. 653 (Pa. 1996)
Summaries of
Petitions for Allowance of Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jan 1, 1996
544 Pa. 653 (Pa. 1996)
holding parking lot adjacent to apartment building constituted trafficway for purposes of DUI statute
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Leesexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. McDonaldstating combination of PSI and standard range sentence, absent more, cannot be considered excessive or unreasonable
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Thomasexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Strowhouerexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Birch-Greyexplaining claim that court did not properly consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Watsonexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Williamsexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Fittsstating allegation court ignored mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Paletistating combination of PSI and standard range sentence, absent more, cannot be considered excessive or unreasonable
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Clarkstating claim that sentencing court failed to consider or did not adequately consider certain factors implicates discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Smithexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Quickstating claim that sentencing court failed to consider or did not adequately consider certain factors implicates discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Hardingstating claim that sentencing court failed to consider or did not adequately consider mitigating factors implicates discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Robinsonstating combination of PSI and standard range sentence, absent more, cannot be considered excessive or unreasonable
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Douglassexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Lewisexplaining claim that court did not consider mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. McCainexplaining general allegation that sentencing court failed to adequately consider certain factors does not raise substantial question
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Conklinstating claim that court imposed excessive and unreasonable sentence without considering mitigating factors challenges sentencing court's discretion
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Campbellstating allegation court ignored mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Bunchstating allegation court ignored mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Patrickstating allegation court ignored mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Kinneystating allegation court ignored mitigating factors challenges discretionary aspects of sentencing
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Cordero-Velezstating combination of PSI and standard range sentence, absent more, cannot be considered excessive or unreasonable
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. Garnerexplaining general allegation that sentencing court failed to consider or adequately consider certain factors does not raise substantial question
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. VarnerCase details for
Petitions for Allowance of Appeal
Case Details
Full title:PETITIONS FOR ALLOWANCE OF APPEAL
Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date published: Jan 1, 1996
Citations
544 Pa. 653 (Pa. 1996)
Citing Cases
Commonwealth v. Strowhouer
As presented, Appellant's claims challenge the discretionary aspects of his sentence. See Commonwealth v.…
Commonwealth v. WoodsonIn so concluding, we explained that "[t]his court has held on numerous occasions that a claim of inadequate…