2011 Pa. Super. 115 - Hill v. Randolph’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
September 2023
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Blockburger v. United States · United States v. Dixon · Lewis v. United States · Commonwealth v. Rieck Investment Corp. · Kmonk-Sullivan v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
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.
“An appeal grounded in double jeopardy raises a question of constitutional law. This Court’s scope of review in making a determination on a question of law. is, as always, plenary. Commonwealth v. Mattis, 454 Pa.Super. 605 , 686 A.2d 408, 410 (1996). “The Double Jeopardy Clause, applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, provides that no person shall ‘be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.’” Commonwealth v. Decker, 445 Pa.Super. 101 , 664 A.2d 1028, 1029 (1995) (citing [U.S. Const.0 amend. V.). “Furthermore, the Double Jeopardy Clause [ ] protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal. It protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction. And it protects against multiple punishments for the same offense.” Id. Commonwealth v. Jackson, 10 A.3d 341, 344-345 (Pa. Super. 2010). Typically, to determine whether a defendant’s protection from multiple punishments for the same offense has been violated, we apply the test set forth in [Blockburger,] [s]ee Commonwealth v. Beckwith, 449 Pa.Super. 433 , 674 A.2d 276, 279 (1996). The [United States] Supreme Court explained this test as follows: In both the multiple punishment and multiple prosecution contexts, th[e United States Supreme] Court has concluded that where the two offenses for which the defendant is punished or tried cannot survive the “same-elements” test, the double jeopardy bar applies. The same:elements ' test, sometime”
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.