2010 Pa. Super. 108 - Commonwealth v. Padillas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) could not have been obtained prior to the conclusion of the trial by the exercise of reasonable diligence; (2) is not merely corroborative or cumulative; (3) will not be used solely to impeach the credibility of a witness; and (4) would likely result in a different verdict if a new trial were granted.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Small, E., Aplt. · 2012 Pa. Super. 226 - Commonwealth v. Foreman

2. “Whether the Superior Court erred in reversing the PCRA court's grant of a new trial based on after-discovered evidence by finding that Tyson's testimony was merely cumulative and corroborative of the exculpatory evidence presented at [appellant]'s trial?”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Small, E., Aplt.

3. “a court should consider the integrity of the alleged after-discovered evidence, the motive of those offering the evidence, and the overall strength of the evidence supporting the conviction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Sandusky