2005 Pa. Super. 22 - Commonwealth v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently May 2023 · most notably Commonwealth v. Baumhammers (2008), United States v. Hinton (2005)
4 federal appellate · 23 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 Crawford v. Washington · Ohio v. Roberts · Chambers v. Mississippi · California v. Green · Commonwealth v. Freeman
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rule 803. Hearsay exceptions; availability of declarant immaterial The following statements, as hereinafter defined, are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even though the declarant is available as a witness: (1) Present sense impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the de-clarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter. (2) Excited utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition. (3) Then existing mental, emotional, or physical condition. A statement of the declarant’s then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition, such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, and bodily health. A statement of memory or belief offered to prove the fact remembered or believed is included in this exception only if it relates to the execution, revocation, identification, or terms of declarant’s will.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[A] spontaneous declaration by a person whose mind has been suddenly made subject to an overpowering emotion caused by some unexpected and shocking occurrence, which that person has just participated in or closely witnessed, and made in reference to some phase of that occurrence which he perceived, and this declaration must be made so near the occurrence both in time and place as to exclude the likelihood of its having emanated in whole or in part from his reflective faculties.... Thus, it must be shown first, that [the declarant] had witnessed an event sufficiently startling and so close in point of time as to render her reflective though[t] processes inoperable and, second, that her declarations were a spontaneous reaction to that startling event.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“under the third classification of testimonial statements, namely, `statements that were made under circumstances which would lead an objective witness reasonably to believe that the statement would be available for use at a later trial.'”
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.