Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2007 Pa. Super. 314 - Commonwealth v. Blackwell

2007 Pa. Super. 314 - Commonwealth v. Blackwell’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth v. Turner · 379 Pa. Super. 390 - Commonwealth v. Finley · Commonwealth v. McGill · Commonwealth v. Reed · Commonwealth v. Bennett

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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[O]ur scope of review is limited by the parameters of the [PCRA], Our standard of review permits us to consider only whether the PCRA court’s determination is supported by the evidence of record and whether it is free from legal error. Moreover, in general we may affirm the decision of the [PCRA] court if there is any basis on the record to support the [PCRA] court’s action; this is so even if we rely on a different basis in our decision to affirm.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(b) Time for filing petition.— (1) Any petition under this subchapter, including a second or subsequent petition, shall be filed within one year of the date the judgment becomes final, unless the petition alleges and the petitioner proves that: (i) the failure to raise the claim previously was the result of interference by government officials with the presentation of the claim in violation of the Constitution or laws of this Commonwealth or the Constitution or laws of the United States;....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It is the petitioner’s burden to plead and prove an exception to the PCRA-timeliness rule_Normally, failure to allege a timeliness exception in the PCRA petition itself precludes the petitioner from raising it on appeal.... [However,] [t]he Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has recently noted that it has “allowed PCRA petitioners some leeway in the preservation of claims in their petitions when [the Court] determined that the circumstances demanded it.””
    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.