Commonwealth v. Moyers
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKelly, Judge
I join in all aspects of the majority opinion except the treatment of appellant’s challenge to the discretionary aspects of sentence. A recent en banc panel of this Court has ruled that to evaluate the substantive merits of challenges to discretionary aspects of sentences without regard to whether the appearance of a substantial question has been presented, as does the majority, allows appellant “ ‘in effect [to obtain] an appeal as of right from the discretionary aspects of a sentence.’ ” Commonwealth v. Williams, 386 Pa.Super. 322, 327, 562 A.2d 1385, 1388 (1989) (quoting Commonwealth v.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TuladzieckiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. GambalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. WillisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Commonwealth v. OsteenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.