313 Pa. Super. 231 - Commonwealth v. Stafford’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The policy underlying the requirement that the sentencing judge state of record the reasons for the sentence is found in the need to make public “the thought process by which he arrives at a particular sentence.” Commonwealth v. O’Brien, 282 Pa.Super. 193, 196 , 422 A.2d 894, 895 (1980); See also Commonwealth v. Stafford, [ 313 Pa.Super. 231 , 459 A.2d 824 (1983) ]. By affording appellate courts some basis upon which to fully comprehend and fairly review the actions of the sentencing court, this directive acts as a shield against arbitrary sentencing decisions while, at the same time, discouraging] the entertainment of improper or irrelevant factors. Commonwealth v. Kraft, 294 Pa.Super. 599, 602 , 440 A.2d 627, 630 (1982); Commonwealth v. Stafford, supra. Although our courts have never required that the statement of reasons cite to specific language of the Sentencing Code, Commonwealth v. Wicks, [ 265 Pa.Super. 305 , 401 A.2d 1223 (1979) ], it should, nonetheless, evince the court’s reflection on the standards mentioned in the Code and should contain “some explanation of how consideration of those guidelines affected the determination of sentence.” Commonwealth v. O’Brien, [supra], 422 A.2d at 896, quoting Commonwealth v. Wareham, 259 Pa.Super. 527, 534 , 393 A.2d 951, 954 (1978).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 370 Pa. Super. 544 - Commonwealth v. Thomas

2. “The first responsibility is a fact-finding responsibility: the judge must be sure he has enough information. The second responsibility is an application-and-explanation responsibility: the judge must apply to the information he has gathered the guidelines specified in the Sentencing Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 9701 et seq., and explain how the sentence he has selected is responsive to, and reflects the standards embodied in, those guidelines. If the judge fails to fulfill these responsibilities, we must vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 332 Pa. Super. 75 - Commonwealth v. Mills