2011 Pa. Super. 256 - Commonwealth v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The standard and scope of review for a challenge to the denial of a suppression motion is whether the factual findings are supported by the record and whether the legal conclusions drawn from those facts are correct. When reviewing the rulings of a suppression court, [the appellate court] considers only the evidence of the prosecution and so much of the evidence for the defense as remains uncontradicted when read in the context of the record as a whole. When the record supports the findings of the suppression court, [the court is] bound by those facts and may reverse only if the legal conclusions drawn therefrom are in error.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2014 Pa. Super. 44 - Commonwealth v. Orie · Commonwealth v. Dougalewicz

2. “only the evidence of the prosecution and so much of the evidence for the defense as remains uncontradicted when read in the context of the record as a whole. When the record supports the findings of the suppression court, we are bound by those facts and may reverse only if the legal conclusions drawn therefrom are in error.”

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

3. “[A]n appellate court cannot consider anything which is not part of the record in the case ... because for purposes of appellate review, what is not of record does not exist.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hassel, R. v. Franzi, J.