Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 125 A3D 800 - Commonwealth v. Haynes

Commonwealth v. Haynes’s Empirical Analysis

2015

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
January 2020
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Almendarez-Torres v. United States · Alleyne v. United States · Commonwealth v. Booth · 2010 Pa. Super. 46 - Commonwealth v. Moury · Commonwealth v. Bullock

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

  1. “[w]e conduct a four-part analysis to determine: (1) whether [the] appellant .has filed a timely notice of appeal, see Pa. R.A.P. 902 and 903; (2) whether the issue was properly preserved at sentencing or in a motion to reconsider and modify sentence, see Pa.R.Crim.P. 720; (3) whether [the] appellant’s brief has a fatal defect, Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f); and (4) whether there is a substantial question that the sentence appealed from is not appropriate under the Sentencing Code, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9781(b).”
    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.