2016 Pa. Super. 155 - Commonwealth v. Stiles’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2024
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miller v. Alabama · Commonwealth v. Widmer · In the Interest of L.J. · Commonwealth v. Craver · Commonwealth v. Cousar
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.
“[i]n order to preserve a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, an appellant's [Pa.R.A.P.] 1925(b) statement must state with specificity the element or elements upon which the appellant alleges that the evidence was insufficient.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Such specificity is of particular importance in cases where, as here, [Appellant] was convicted of multiple crimes each of which contains numerous elements that the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he Statement shall concisely identify each ruling or error that the appellant intends to challenge with sufficient detail to identify all pertinent issues for the judge.”
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.