2011 Pa. Super. 36 - Commonwealth v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The determination of the scope and limits of cross-examination are within the discretion of the trial court, and we cannot reverse those findings absent a clear abuse of discretion or an error of law.” Commonwealth v. Brown, 449 Pa.Super. 346 , 673 A.2d 975, 978 (1996) (citing Commonwealth v. Nolen, 535 Pa. 77, 82 , 634 A.2d 192, 195 (1993)), appeal denied, 545 Pa. 675 , 682 A.2d 306 (1996). [A]n abuse of discretion is not a mere error in judgment, but, rather, involves bias, ill will, partiality, prejudice, manifest unreasonableness, or misapplication of law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2011 Pa. Super. 269 - Commonwealth v. Handfield

2. “[T]he opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness' prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.”

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