2005 Pa. Super. 52 - Commonwealth v. Estman’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Gibbs v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole · Atkinson v. Evans · Commonwealth v. Morris · Morabito's Auto Sales v. Com., Dept. of Transp. · Township of Whitehall v. American Casualty Co. of Reading
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While the wording of the statute arguably rings procedural, the effect of the statute is substantive. As the court reasoned, applying 9303 retroactively would permit the defendant to face criminal charges for conduct she could not have been prosecuted for prior to the enactment of Section 9303. It is analytically identical to reviving criminal charges after a prior statute of limitations has run with the enactment of a new statute of limitations. Trial Court Opinion at 5. On that basis, we agree with the trial court’s decision granting appellee’s motion to dismiss.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[c]ase law provides ... that legislation concerning purely procedural matters, not substantive matters, may be applied to litigation existing at the time of passage as well as litigation commenced after its passage. As a general- rule, substantive law is that part of the law which creates, defines and regulates rights, while procedural laws are those that address methods by which rights are enforced.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Notwithstanding the provisions of 1 Pa.C.S. § 1933 (relating to particular controls general) or any other statute to the contrary, where the same conduct of a defendant violates more than one criminal statute, the defendant may be prosecuted under all available statutory criminal provisions without regard to the generality or specificity of the statutes.”
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.