2010 Pa. Super. 229 - Commonwealth v. Gonzalez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) ... a sentencing court must designate a sentence as an RRRI sentence whenever the defendant is eligible for that designation, and (2) ... a defendant is eligible for that designation if he has not been previously convicted of certain enumerated offenses and “[djoes not demonstrate a history of present or past violent behavior.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2016 Pa. Super. 167 - Commonwealth v. Hodge · 2014 Pa. Super. 122 - Commonwealth v. Barbaro

2. “(1) Does not demonstrate a history of present or past violent behavior. (2) Has not been subject to a sentence the calculation of which includes an enhancement for the use of a deadly weapon as defined under law or the sentencing guidelines promulgated by the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing or the attorney for the Commonwealth has not demonstrated that the defendant has been found guilty of or was convicted of an offense involving a deadly weapon or offense under 18 Pa.C.S. Ch. 61 (relating to firearms and other dangerous articles) or the equivalent offense under the laws of the United States or one of its territories or possessions, another state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or a foreign nation. (3) Has not been found guilty of or previously convicted of or adjudicated delinquent for or an attempt or conspiracy to commit a personal injury crime as defined under section 103 of the act of November 24,1998 (P.L. 882, No. Ill), [18 P.S. § 11.103] known as the Crime Victims Act, except for an offense under 18 Pa.C.S. § 2701 (relating to simple assault) when the offense is a misdemeanor of the third degree, or an equivalent offense under the laws of the United States or one of its territories or possessions, another state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or a foreign nation. (4) Has not been found guilty or previously convicted or adjudicated delinquent for violating any of the following provisions or an equivalent offe”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Chester, M., Aplt.

3. “Moreover,1 find that the majority’s concentration on the definition of “Crime of violence” as it is defined in [42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9714 (commonly referred to as the recidivist, statute) ] is, misplaced. In fact, I do not believe that the [RRRI Act’s] reference to a “history of present or past violent. behavior” necessarily equates to a prior, criminal offense. There are myriad circumstances where violent behavior does not result in a criminal conviction, e.g., a mutual fight where neither party files a criminal complaint, an assault" on a family member who refused to cooperate with the criminal investigation, an indicated claim of child abuse that'lacked sufficient proof to proceed to trial, or where prosecution of a violent offense is barred by the statute of limitations. Nothing in the statute reveals an intent to limit the sentencing court’s consideration under this subsection to convictions. Instead, the broad statutory language encompasses any violent behavior regardless of criminal liability. I also note that the recidivist statute is punitive and was designed to impose harsh penalties upon a narrow class of repeat offenders. In contrast, the RRRI program was designed to grant leniency to non-violent .offenders who- could benefit from a program to reduce their risk of recidivism, and who do not pose a risk to the public upon their early release from prison.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2016 Pa. Super. 10 - Commonwealth v. Cullen-Doyle