2011 Pa. Super. 28 - Commonwealth v. Pope’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
September 2025
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Porter · United States v. Carbone · Commonwealth v. Brown · Carter v. United States Steel Corp. · 388 Pa. Super. 484 - Commonwealth v. Hart
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When evaluating jury instructions, the charge must be read as a whole to determine whether it was fair or prejudicial. The trial court has broad discretion in phrasing its instructions, and may choose its own wording so long as the law is clearly, adequately, and accurately presented to the jury for its consideration.”
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.