2003 Pa. Super. 49 - Commonwealth v. Ryerson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[Thus,] [u]nder our law, the focus is on the information provided to the issuing authority and its response to that information. Probable cause is a practical and fluid concept that turns on the assessment of probabilities in particular factual contexts, which cannot readily be reduced to a neat set of legal rules. The role of the magistrate, [as indicated supra ], is to make a "practical, common sense decision" of whether, "given all of the circumstances set forth in the affidavit," ... there is a "fair probability" that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place. The role of the reviewing court and the appellate court is to ascertain whether the issuing magistrate appropriately determined that probable cause existed for the issuance of the warrant.... Both the reviewing court and this Court must accord deference to a magistrate's finding of probable cause.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2016 Pa. Super. 94 - Commonwealth v. Rapak · Commonwealth v. Manuel

2. “Our standard of review for an appeal denying a motion to suppress is well settled. In reviewing the decision of a suppression court, we must ascertain whether the record supports the factual findings of the suppression court and then determine the reasonableness of the inferences and legal conclusions drawn therefrom. We will consider only the evidence of the Commonwealth and that defense evidence which remains uncontradicted when read in the context of the entire record.”

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

3. “[i]n determining whether the warrant is supported by probable cause, the magistrate may not consider any evidence outside the four-corners of the affidavit.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2016 Pa. Super. 94 - Commonwealth v. Rapak