2011 Pa. Super. 32 - Commonwealth v. Charleston’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 18 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “To guide the crucial inquiry as to whether or not a seizure has been effected, the United States Supreme Court has devised an objective test entailing a determination of whether, in view of all surrounding circumstances, a reasonable person would have believed that he was free to leave. In evaluating the circumstances, the focus is directed toward whether, by means of physical force or show of authority, the citizen-subject’s movement has in some way been restrained. In making this determination, courts must apply the totality-of-the-circumstances approach, with no single factor dictating the ultimate conclusion as to whether a seizure has occurred.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re B.R.

2. “While we could arguably deem [Charleston's] Miranda claim waived, we are loathe to do so due to the seriousness of the charges in this case and the fact that the record demonstrates that [Charleston] asserted Miranda claims before the trial court that challenged the admissibility of the statement he made to Detective Singleton on the basis that [Charleston] did not voluntarily waive his rights prior to giving the statement.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Charleston v. Gilmore

3. “this court may affirm the decision of the trial court if there is any basis on the record to support the trial court's action; this is so even if we rely on a different basis in our decision to affirm”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Crosley