Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 186 Pa. Super. 442 - Commonwealth v. Prep

186 Pa. Super. 442 - Commonwealth v. Prep’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
3
states following
January 2011
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently January 2011 · most notably Hopkinson v. State (1981), Commonwealth v. Thomas (1963)

31 state decisions

1101958196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Thayer · Commonwealth v. Wood · State v. Briggs · Linn v. Employers Reinsurance Corp. · Commonwealth v. Schmunk

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

  1. “It is a well established theory of the law that, where one puts in force an agency for the commission of crime, he, in legal contemplation, accompanies the same to the point where it becomes effectual; . . .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A prosecution for the crime of cheating by fraudulent pretenses should be brought in the county where the offense is completed, that is, where the chattel, money or valuable security is actually obtained by the defendant. Com. v. Hancock, supra, 177 Pa. Superior Ct. 585, 593 , 112 A. 2d 407 ; Com. v. Tarsnane, 170 Pa. Superior Ct. 265, 267 , 85 A. 2d 606 . The court below concluded that the checks were obtained by Prep when they were placed in the mail. Prep contends that, although the checks were mailed in Harrisburg, he did not actually receive them until the mail was delivered to him in Frackville.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It is well settled that within the Commonwealth `. . . prosecution for criminal conspiracy may be brought in the county where the unlawful combination or confederation was formed, or in any county where an overt act was committed by any of the conspirators in furtherance of that unlawful combination or confederacy': [Citations].”
    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.