Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Vasquez

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 28, 2000No. 0013 E.D. Appeal Docket 1999PublishedCited by 90 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NEWMAN, Justice.

In this direct appeal, we must resolve whether a trial court had the authority to impose a mandatory fine, which it initially neglected to render in its judgement of sentence. At issue in this case is the interpretation by a trial court of the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions of 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508. The trial court concluded, and the Superior Court agreed, that where the Commonwealth properly invokes the mandatory sentencing provisions found in 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508, the trial court must apply the entire, relevant provision and can correct, at any time, a sentence it…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GribbleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Commonwealth v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  3. Commonwealth v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. IsabellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  5. Fajohn v. Com., Dept. of CorrectionsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by90 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Batts, Q., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. Commonwealth v. HolmesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. Commonwealth v. InfanteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, M., ApltSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  5. Commonwealth v. TobinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014

85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API