2013 Pa. Super. 175 - Commonwealth v. Escobar’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “overall emphasis was that the deportation statute in question makes most drug convicts subject to deportation in the sense that they certainly become deportable, not in the sense that plea counsel should know and state with certainty that the federal government will, in fact, initiate deportation proceedings.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Sanmartin Prado · 364 Wis. 2d 63 - State v. Hatem M. Shata

2. “whether the U.S. Attorney General and/or other personnel would necessarily take all the steps needed to institute and carry out Escobar's actual deportation was not an absolute certainty when he pled.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Sanmartin Prado · 364 Wis. 2d 63 - State v. Hatem M. Shata

3. “Any alien who at any time after admission has been convicted of a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State, the United States, or a foreign country relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of title 21), other than a single offense involving possession for one's own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana, is deportable.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 364 Wis. 2d 63 - State v. Hatem M. Shata