2005 Pa. Super. 274 - Commonwealth v. Dobbins’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
January 2013
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Leet · COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. Kline · Commonwealth v. Lockridge · 450 Pa. Super. 583 - Commonwealth v. Taylor · Kopko v. Miller
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“shall [not] be deemed to limit the authority of the Bureau of Drug Control, the Pennsylvania State Police, the Department of Justice or any other law enforcement agency in dealing with law enforcement matters with respect to”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the sheriff of a county of the second class and deputy sheriffs of a county of the second class who have successfully completed the requirements [of Act 120].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“any person who is by law given the power to enforce the law when acting within the scope of that persons employment.”
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.