2013 Pa. Super. 64 - Commonwealth v. Harvard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A substantial question requires a demonstration that the sentence violates either a specific provision of the sentencing scheme set forth in the Sentencing Code or a particular fundamental norm underlying the sentencing process. This Court’s inquiry must focus on the reasons for which the appeal is sought, in contrast to the facts underlying the appeal, which are necessary only to decide the appeal on the merits. Whether a substantial question has been raised is determined on a case-by-case basis; the fact that a sentence is within the statutory limits does not mean a substantial question cannot be raised.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2017 Pa. Super. 196 - Commonwealth v. Ball

2. “In order to prove that a defendant had constructive possession of a prohibited item, the Commonwealth must establish that the defendant had both the ability to consciously exercise control over it as well as the intent to exercise such control.”

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

3. “A magistrate's finding of probable cause must be based on facts described within the four corners of the affidavit[,] and our scope of review of a suppression court's ruling is confined primarily to questions of law.”

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