2002 Pa. Super. 114 - Commonwealth v. Dinicola’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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. “When a defendant claims that he or she has been denied effective assistance of counsel, courts presume that counsel was effective unless proven otherwise by the defendant. To prove ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must show (i) that the underlying claim is of arguable merit; (ii) that counsel had no reasonable basis designed to effectuate the defendant’s interests for the act or omission in question; and (in) that counsel’s ineffectiveness actually prejudiced the defendant. In determining whether counsel’s decisions had a reasonable basis, a court does not question whether a more logical alternative course of action existed; rather, a court examines only whether counsel’s decisions had a reasonable basis designed to effectuate the defendant’s interest.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2005 Pa. Super. 83 - Commonwealth v. Snyder

2. “[w]hen the Commonwealth referenced DiNicola's pre-arrest silence prior to DiNicola testifying, the Commonwealth removed an incentive for DiNicola to assert his right not to testify.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. DiNicola

3. “is probative of the defendant's credibility and the defendant will not be unduly prejudiced by its admission.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. DiNicola