2009 Pa. Super. 259 - Commonwealth v. Byrd’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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

1. “When the Commonwealth appeals from a suppression order, we follow a clearly defined standard of review and consider only the evidence from the defendant’s witnesses together with the evidence of the prosecution that, when read in the context of the entire record, remains uncontradicted. The suppression court’s findings of fact bind an appellate court if the record supports those findings. The suppression court’s conclusions of law, however, are not binding on an appellate court, whose duty is to determine if the suppression court properly applied the law to the facts.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2011 Pa. Super. 215 - Commonwealth v. Durr · 2011 Pa. Super. 109 - Commonwealth v. Baez

2. “Abandonment is primarily a question of intent, and intent may be inferred from words spoken, acts done, and other objective .facts. All relevant circumstances existing at the time of the alleged abandonment should be considered, The issue is not abandonment in the strict property-right sense but whether the person prejudiced by the search had voluntarily discarded, left behind, or otherwise relinquished his interest in the property in question so that he could no longer retain a reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to it at the time of the search.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2017 Pa. Super. 231 - Commonwealth v. Cruz