Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Arriaga

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 7, 1993No. 638PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge:

Appellant raises a constitutional challenge to a sentencing provision for violation of the Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act which provides for heightened penalties for repeat offenders. See 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 7508(a)(3)(i). We find the provision constitutional and therefore affirm the judgment of sentence.

This is an appeal from a judgment of sentence imposed for delivery of a controlled substance (cocaine) and criminal conspiracy. The facts underlying appellant’s arrest and trial are irrelevant to this appeal as appellant’s sole issue is the constitutionality of the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Rummel v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Spencer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  4. Gryger v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. McDonald v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1901

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. QuinlanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Commonwealth v. FultonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. Commonwealth v. TustinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Commonwealth v. DasilvaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. Commonwealth v. QuinlanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

5 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