2003 Pa. Super. 503 - Commonwealth v. Dreves’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably 2007 Pa. Super. 404 - Commonwealth v. Patterson (2007), 2006 Pa. Super. 314 - Commonwealth v. Lewis (2006)
25 state decisions
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 Commonwealth v. Peterkin · Mosaica Academy Charter School v. Commonwealth, Department of Education · City of Erie v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board · Commonwealth v. Stock · Commonwealth v. Carpenter
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Ojrdinarily, when a post-sentence motion is filed[,] an appellant has thirty (30) days from the denial of the post-sentence motion within which to file a notice of appeal. However, by the explicit terms of Pa.R.Crim.P. 720(A)(2), the provision allowing thirty days from the denial of post-trial motions is contingent upon the timely filing of a post-trial motion. ... “[I]n order for the denial of post-sentence motions to become the triggering event, it is necessary that the post-sentence motions be timely filed. [Ajbsent a timely filed post-sentence motion, the triggering event remains the date sentence is imposed.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“To be entitled to file a post-sentence motion nunc pro tunc, a defendant must, within 30 days after the imposition of sentence, dem: onstrate sufficient cause, i.e., reasons that excuse the late filing... .When the defendant has met this burden and has shown sufficient cause, the trial court must then exercise its discretion in deciding whether to permit the defendant to file the post-sentence motion nunc pro tunc. If the trial court chooses to permit a defendant to file a post-sentence motion nunc pro tunc, the court must do so expressly [within thirty days after the imposition of the sentence].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[A] written post-sentence motion shall be filed no later than 10 days after imposition of sentence”
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.