1999 Pa. Super. 326 - Commonwealth v. Korenkiewicz’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
January 2012
most recently cited
22 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Adams v. Williams · Lee v. Brown · Schlossberg v. Maryland Comptroller of the Treasury · Commonwealth v. Klinghoffer
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our standard [of] review in addressing a challenge to a trial court’s denial of a suppression motion is whether the factual findings are supported by the record and whether the legal conclusions drawn from those facts are correct. When reviewing rulings of a suppression court, we must consider only the evidence of the prosecution and so much of the evidence for the defense as remains uncon-tradicted when read in the context of the record as a whole. Where the record supports the findings of the suppression court, we are bound by those facts and may reverse only if the legal conclusions drawn therefrom are in error.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“A police officer, however, need not personally observe the illegal or suspicious conduct, which forms the basis for the reasonable suspicion, but may rely, under certain circumstances, on information provided by third parties. . . . Pennsylvania law also permits a vehicle stop based upon a radio bulletin if evidence is offered at the suppression hearing to establish reasonable suspicion. The mere fact that the police receive their information over the police radio does not, of itself, establish or negate the existence of reasonable suspicion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Established Pennsylvania law generally accepts that intoxication is a condition within the understanding or powers of observation of ordinary citizens.”
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.