2002 Pa. Super. 255 - Commonwealth v. Nobalez’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
April 2015
most recently cited
13 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Albino · Commonwealth v. Tilghman · Abraham v. Department of Corrections · Commonwealth v. Banks · 446 Pa. Super. 87 - Commonwealth v. Fitzpatrick
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When reviewing an order denying a motion to suppress evidence, we must determine whether the evidence of record supports the factual findings of the trial court. In making this determination, this [C]ourt may only consider the Commonwealth’s evidence and the defendant’s evidence that remains uncon-tradicted. We view the Commonwealth’s evidence, not as a layperson, but through eyes of a trained police officer. We do not review the evidence piecemeal, but consider the totality of the circumstances in assessing whether probable cause existed.... If the evidence supports the findings of the trial court, those findings bind us and we may reverse only if the .suppression court drew erroneous legal conclusions from the evidence.”
3 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.