Commonwealth v. Snyder

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Snyder

169 A.3d 527

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 16, 2017·No. No. 782 MAL 2016·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of May, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by'Petitioner, is:

Did the Superior Court err in finding that where Mr. Snyder was charged with violations of 75 Pa.C.S. § 1543(b)(l.l) on January 27, 2014 and September 28, 2014, and was convicted of and sentenced for both violations on May 11, 2015, the September 29, 2014 violation was a “second violation,” pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. § 1543(b)(l.l)(ii), with [528]*528increased grading and an increased mandatory minimum sentence?

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of May, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by'Petitioner, is:

Did the Superior Court err in finding that where Mr. Snyder was charged with violations of 75 Pa.C.S. § 1543(b)(l.l) on January 27, 2014 and September 28, 2014, and was convicted of and sentenced for both violations on May 11, 2015, the September 29, 2014 violation was a “second violation,” pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. § 1543(b)(l.l)(ii), with [528]*528increased grading and an increased mandatory minimum sentence?

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Commonwealth v. Snyder, 169 A.3d 527 (Pa. 2017).

Pincite

169 A.3d 527 (Commonwealth v. Snyder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related