2003 Pa. Super. 405 - Commonwealth v. McLaughlin’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
January 2026
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Wallace · 422 Pa. Super. 615 - Ham v. Sulek · 2003 Pa. Super. 320 - Commonwealth v. Weeks · Commonwealth v. Cromartie · 2003 Pa. Super. 250 - Commonwealth v. Baker
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 9543.1. Postconviction DNA testing (a) Motion - (1) An individual convicted of a criminal offense in a court of this Commonwealth and serving a term of imprisonment or awaiting execution because of a sentence of death may apply by making a written motion to the sentencing court for the performance of forensic DNA testing on specific evidence that is related to the investigation or prosecution that resulted in the judgment of conviction. (2) The evidence may have been discovered either prior to or after the applicant’s conviction. * * * If the evidence was discovered prior to the applicant’s conviction, the evidence shall not have been subject to the DNA testing requested because the technology for testing was not in existence at the time of the trial or the applicant’s counsel did not seek testing at the time of the trial in a case where a verdict was rendered on or before January 1, 1995 .... (c) Requirements. — In any motion under subsection (a), under penalty of perjury, the applicant shall: (1) (i) specify the evidence to be tested; (ii) state that the applicant consents to provide samples of bodily fluid for use in the DNA testing; and (iii) acknowledge that the applicant understands that, if the motion is granted, any data obtained from any DNA samples or test results may be entered into law enforcement databases .... (2) (i) assert the applicant’s actual innocence of the offense for which the appellant was convicted; and (3)present a prima facie case demonstrating th”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) Motion.— (1) An individual convicted of a criminal offense in a court of this Commonwealth and serving a term of imprisonment ... may apply by making a written motion to the sen tencing court for the performance of forensic DNA-testing on specific evidence that is related to the investigation or prosecution that resulted in the judgment of conviction. (c) Requirements. — In any motion under subsection (a), under penalty of perjury, the applicant shall: (1) (i) specify the evidence to be tested; (ii) state that the applicant consents to provide samples of' bodily fluid for use in the DNA testing; and (iii) acknowledge that the applicant understands that, if the motion is granted, any data obtained from any DNA samples or test results may be entered into law enforcement databases, may be used in the investigation of other crimes and may be used as evidence against the applicant in other cases. (2) (i) assert the applicant’s actual innocence of the offense for which the applicant was convicted; (3) present a prima facie case demonstrating that the: (i) identity of or the participation in the crime by the perpetrator was at issue in the proceedings that resulted in the applicant’s conviction and sentencing; and (ii) DNA testing of the specific evidence, assuming exculpatory results, would establish: (A) the applicant’s actual innocence of the offense for which the applicant was convicted[.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Post conviction DNA testing does not directly create an exception to § 9545’s one-year time bar. See 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9543.1. Rather it allows for a convicted individual to first obtain DNA testing which could then be used within a PCRA petition to establish new facts in order to satisfy the requirements of an exception under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(2). See 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9543.1(f)(1).”
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.