Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 420 Pa. Super. 565 - Commonwealth v. Dutter

420 Pa. Super. 565 - Commonwealth v. Dutter’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
September 2003
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth v. Devers · 328 Pa. Super. 60 - Commonwealth v. Royer · 395 Pa. Super. 552 - Commonwealth v. Minott · 353 Pa. Super. 255 - Commonwealth v. Chesson · 372 Pa. Super. 369 - Commonwealth v. Sanchez

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. “The statute requires a trial judge who intends to sentence a defendant outside the guidelines to demonstrate on the record, as a proper starting point, his awareness of the sentencing guidelines. Having done so, the sentencing court may deviate from the guidelines, if necessary, to fashion a sentence which takes into account the protection of the public, the rehabilitative needs of the defendant, and the gravity of the particular offense as it relates to the impact on the life of the victim and the community, so long as he also states of record “the factual basis and specific reasons which compelled [him] to deviate from the guideline range.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In every case where the court imposes a sentence outside the sentencing guidelines adopted by the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing ... the court shall provide a contemporaneous written statement of the reason or reasons for the deviation from the guidelines. Failure to comply shall be grounds for vacating the sentence and resentencing the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.