2003 Pa. Super. 507 - Commonwealth v. English’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently March 2026
13 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. Brundidge · Commonwealth v. Garrus · 445 Pa. Super. 571 - Commonwealth v. Gommer · Commonwealth v. Duncan · 360 Pa. Super. 560 - Commonwealth v. Weik
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.
“[I]n this [pre-intrusion] line of cases ... the warrantless seizure of evidence cannot be justified by the plain view alone.... Even where the object is contraband, this Court has repeatedly stated and enforced the basic rule that police may not enter and make a warrantless seizure. Thus, in those cases in which the view precedes an intrusion into a constitutionally protected area, the officer must be able to rely on exigent circumstances ... or he must obtain a warrant before he seizes the evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The burden is on the Commonwealth to “present clear and convincing evidence that the circumstances surrounding the opportunity to search were truly exigent ... and that the exigency was in no way attributable to the decision by the police to forego seeking a warrant.” Moreover, “[a]ll decisions made pursuant to the exigent circumstances exception must be made cautiously, for it is an exception which by its nature can very easily swallow the rule unless applied in only restricted circumstances.””
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.