Legal Opinion

Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Ali, R.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 22, 2016No. 84 MAP 2015PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JUSTICE DOUGHERTY

This Court granted discretionary review to determine the propriety of the trial court considering victim impact evidence at a sentencing proceeding where the offenses at issue were not crimes against a person. Citing 42 Pa.C.S. § 9738 (“Victim impact statements”), the Superior Court held, as a matter of law, such evidence is irrelevant and inadmissible at sentencing under such circumstances, the trial court therefore abused its discretion, and resentencing was required. We respectfully disagree with this broad holding and, in particular, the construction of Section…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DeversSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Commonwealth v. GriffinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Commonwealth v. BegleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, M., ApltSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  5. Commonwealth v. FlorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. AliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  2. Com. of Pa. v. KingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  3. Commonwealth v. Bell, T., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  4. Commonwealth v. MonarchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  5. Com. v. Adams, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019

21 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