Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2001 Pa. Super. 345 - Commonwealth v. Miller

2001 Pa. Super. 345 - Commonwealth v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
5
states following
December 2010
most recently cited

16 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252 · 18 U.S.C. § 2522 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)

Relies on Alaska v. United States · North Carolina v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission · E.B. v. Verniero · T.B. v. L.R.M. · Commonwealth v. Gaffney

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

  1. “Appellant further alleges that he is not subject to the registration requirements because the acts underlying his conviction occurred before the effective date of Megan’s Law. This argument fails. Our Supreme Court has held that there is no violation of any ex post facto provision in requiring registration when the acts underlying an individual’s conviction occurred prior to the effective date of the registration requirements. Commonwealth v. Gaffney, 557 Pa. 327 , 733 A.2d 616, 617 (1999). The Court reasoned that the purpose of the legislature in requiring the registration of certain sex offenders was not punitive, but rather to promote public safety. Id. at 619. Accordingly, Appellant is entitled to no relief.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[a]n equivalent offense is that which is substantially identical in nature and definition as the out-of-state or federal offense when compared to the Pennsylvania offense.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “`individuals convicted of an equivalent offense ... where the conviction occurred in another state, territory, Federal court or the District of Columbia....'”
    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.