Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 Pa. Super. 204 - Commonwealth v. Anderson

2002 Pa. Super. 204 - Commonwealth v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth v. Lantzy · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · Rodriguez v. West · Commonwealth v. McCullum · Starr v. Veneziano

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. “As noted supra, however, appellant has already had the benefit of a direct appeal, and at that time did not, challenge his conviction on any basis, including counsel’s ineffectiveness. Rather, the only issues he raised concerned the, unconstitutionality of his sentence. Having succeeded on these issues and having been re-sentenced following remand, appellant could not file another direct appeal attacking his conviction: the only issues reviewable in a direct appeal would be challenges to the sentence imposed following remand.”
    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.