Commonwealth v. Rose
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
ROWLEY, President Judge:
Gary L. Rose, (hereinafter “appellant”) appeals from his judgment of sentence contending that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing an “inappropriate” and “clearly unreasonable” sentence without taking into consideration the fact that appellant’s deed “was a very minimal infraction of the law.” We conclude that appellant has not raised a substantial question as to the propriety of his sentence, and we therefore deny him permission to appeal.
The facts underlying this appeal are very few. On January 5, 1993, appellant entered a floral and gift store in Lock…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TuladzieckiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Commonwealth v. DeversSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Commonwealth v. JonesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Commonwealth v. CatanchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Commonwealth v. ZelinskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Com. v. Davis, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2023
- Com. v. Morris, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2024