Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2016 Pa. Super. 230 - Commonwealth v. Flowers

2016 Pa. Super. 230 - Commonwealth v. Flowers’s Empirical Analysis

2016

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
February 2023
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki · Commonwealth v. Riggins · Commonwealth v. Reaves · Commonwealth v. Gambal · 2013 Pa. Super. 325 - Commonwealth v. Cartrette

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

  1. “[w]e conduct a four part analysis to determine: (1) whether.[the] appellant has filed a timely notice of appeal; (2) whether the issue was properly preserved at sentencing or in a motion to reconsider and modify sentence; (3) whether [the] appellant’s brief has a fatal defect; and (4) whether there is a substantial question that the sentence appealed from is not appropriate under the Sentencing Code.”
    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.