2004 Pa. Super. 38 - Commonwealth v. Dengler’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2024
18 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 Frye v. United States · Commonwealth v. Williams · Commonwealth v. Maldonado · Commonwealth v. Reed · Grady v. Frito-Lay, Inc.
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e view the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth. We will reverse a trial court’s determination of SVP status “only if the Commonwealth has not presented clear and convincing evidence sufficient to enable the trial court to determine that each element required by the statute has been satisfied.” [Commonwealth v. Krouse, 799 A.2d 835 ,] 838 [ (Pa.Super.2002) (en banc) ]; see also [Commonwealth v.] Maldonado, [ 576 Pa. 101, 110 ], 838 A.2d [710,] 715 [(2003)] (defining clear and convincing evidence standard for purposes of Megan’s Law as evidence “ ‘so clear, direct, weighty, and convincing as to enable the [trier of fact] to come to a clear conviction, without hesitancy, of the truth of the precise facts [in] issue’ ”) (citation omitted).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense as set forth in section 9795.1 (relating to registration) 9 and who is determined to be a sexually violent predator under section 9795.4 (relating to assessments) due to a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses. 10”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“that psychological or psychiatric testimony of an expert at an SVP proceeding is not novel scientific evidence subject to Frye "), aff'd, 586 Pa. 54 , 890 A.2d 372 (2005); Westerheide v. State, 767 So.2d 637, 657-58 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2000) ("The admission of expert testimony from psychologists and psychiatrists for the purpose of predicting future dangerousness caused by mental illness or abnormalities is nothing new or novel to the law.”
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.