2000 Pa. Super. 229 - Commonwealth v. Cobbs’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 2003
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Valderrama · Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Whitney · Commonwealth v. Williams · Prall v. Prall
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. the evidence has been discovered after trial and could not have been obtained prior to the conclusion of trial by the exercise of due diligence; 2. the evidence is not merely corroborative or cumulative; 3. the evidence will not be used solely for impeachment purposes; and 4. the evidence is of such a nature and character that a different verdict will likely result if a new trial is granted.”
2 later decisions 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.