Commonwealth v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An officer is justified in insisting that a citizen not conceal his hands during an encounter with police; an officer may make this reasonable request to ensure his or her own protection in case that individual is armed. This Court has stated that "if during a mere encounter, an individual on his own accord, puts his hands in his pocket, thereby creating a potential danger to the safety of a police officer, the officer may justifiably reach for his side arm and order the individual to stop and take his hand out of his pocket. Such reaction by a police officer does not elevate the mere encounter into an investigative detention because the officer's reaction was necessitated by the individual's conduct." Commonwealth v. Carter , 779 A.2d 591 , 594 (Pa.Super. 2001). Coleman , 19 A.3d at 1117 (quoting Commonwealth v. Carter , 779 A.2d 591 , 594 (Pa.Super. 2001) (noting that the fact that the officer asked the appellant to take his hands out of his pockets did not turn the encounter into a seizure) ). See also Commonwealth v. Blair , 860 A.2d 567 , 573 (Pa.Super. 2004) (finding that interaction remained a mere encounter when an officer approached a parked car and asked its occupants to show their hands).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Hemingway

2. “Both the United States and Pennsylvania Supreme Courts have held that the approach of a police officer followed by questioning does not constitute a seizure. Florida v. Bostick , 501 U.S. 429 , 434, 111 S.Ct. 2382 , 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991) (police can approach people at random, ask questions, and seek consent to search) (collecting cases); Florida v. Royer , 460 U.S. 491 , 497, 103 S.Ct. 1319 , 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983) ("law enforcement officers do not violate the Fourth Amendment by merely approaching an individual in the street or in another public place, by asking him is he is willing to answer some questions, [or] by putting questions to him if the person is willing to listen"); Commonwealth v. Smith , 575 Pa. 203 , 836 A.2d 5 , 11 (2003) ("the mere approach of police followed by police questioning ... does not amount to a seizure"); In re D.M. , 566 Pa. 445 , 781 A.2d 1161 , 1164 (2001) ("the police may approach anyone in a public place to talk to him, without any level of suspicion").”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Hemingway

3. “[i]t was reasonable for [the officers] to infer that Appellee may have been armed and dangerous, given his refusal to show his hands and his evasive movements in response to police presence in an area specifically known for high levels of crime and violence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Hemingway