Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2003 Pa. Super. 340 - Commonwealth v. Troy

2003 Pa. Super. 340 - Commonwealth v. Troy’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
February 2023
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2023

7 state decisions

40200320102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on 2003 Pa. Super. 285 - Commonwealth v. Bullick · 2003 Pa. Super. 74 - Commonwealth v. Gooding · 296 Pa. Super. 393 - Commonwealth v. Kidd · Commonwealth v. Coon · 449 Pa. Super. 450 - Commonwealth v. Gilbert

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

  1. “[W]hether[,] viewing all the evidence admitted at trial in the light most favorable to the [Commonwealth as the] ver-diet winner, there is sufficient evidence to enable the fact-finder to find every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. In applying [the above] test, we may not weigh the evidence and substitute our judgment for the fact-finder. In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by •the Commonwealth need not preclude every possibility of innocence. Any doubts regarding a defendant’s guilt may be resolved by the fact-finder unless the evidence is so weak and inconclusive that as a matter of law no probability of fact may be drawn from the combined circumstances. The Commonwealth may sustain its burden of proving every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt by means of wholly circumstantial evidence.”
    5 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.