Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1999 Pa. Super. 68 - Commonwealth v. Laney

1999 Pa. Super. 68 - Commonwealth v. Laney’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 2021

4 state decisions

201999200020102020decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Edwards v. Arizona · McNeil v. Wisconsin · Illinois v. Perkins · Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Kaloustian

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

  1. “In making this determination, we may consider only the evidence of the prosecution’s witnesses and so much of the defense as, fairly read in the context of the record as a whole, remains uncontra-dicted. When the factual findings of the suppression court are supported by the evidence, we may reverse only if there is an error in the legal conclusions drawn from those factual findings.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) Defense counsel failed to raise and litigate the issue that the statements obtained by the State Police from Fetter during oral interceptions were in violation of his rights under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. 2 (2) Defense counsel failed to introduce at trial the custody/visitation order to establish that all visitation exchanges between the defendant and his wife were accomplished with a witness, and he failed to call George Homes, Jr. as a witness to testify that he was present during the visitation exchange on November 6, 1997, in order to establish the time of said exchange. (8)Defense counsel failed to call Gloria Fetter as a witness to testify as to the events of November 6,1997 and the time that the defendant arrived at her home with her son after the visitation exchange. (4) Defense counsel failed to investigate and produce witnesses and other evidence as to the time he was at his doctor’s appointment on November 18, 1997, in order to refute the testimony that he was present at his home when certain statements were made about the victim’s age and that he went to Philadelphia with these witnesses. (5) Defense counsel failed to call Marie Waltz as a witness to refute false allegations that the defendant had improper contact with her. (6) Defense counsel failed to introduce a court order concerning the return of the defendant’s bed in order to refute the testimony of Mr. Yacca that he saw the ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Custodial interrogation means questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody. The warning mandated by Miranda was meant to preserve the privilege during incommunicado interrogation of individuals in a police-dominated atmosphere. That atmosphere is said to generate inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the individual’s will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would not otherwise do so freely.”
    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.