Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, M., Aplt

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 19, 2014No. 34 WAP 2012PublishedCited by 151 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Chief Justice CASTILLE.

The controlling issue in this unusual direct appeal from a conviction arising under the Gaming Act 1 is whether imposition of a mandatory minimum fine of $75,000 for a conviction of a first-degree misdemeanor theft of $200 violates the prohibition of Article I, Section 13 of the Pennsylvania Constitution against excessive fines. 2 For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that, under the circumstances, the fine imposed indeed is unconstitutionally excessive. Accordingly, we vacate that portion of the judgment of sentence involving the mandatory fine and we…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Graham v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  4. Austin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. United States v. BajakajianSupreme Court of the United States · 1998

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

3Cited by151 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Batts, Q., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. Commonwealth v. ReidSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  3. Commonwealth v. JabbieSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  4. Commonwealth v. HeasterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. Shoul v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver LicensingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

146 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