Commonwealth v. Muscheck’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
April 1975
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Johnson v. United States · Commonwealth v. Copertino · 205 Pa. Super. 599 - Commonwealth v. Smyser · United States v. Barkouskas · Commonwealth v. Samolsky
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.
““NAME OF OWNER, OCCUPANT OF PREMISES AND/OR PERSON TO BE SEARCHED: William Barton, residence 1008 S. 49th Street and others on premises. ADDRESS (STREET AND NO.) AND DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES AND/OR PERSONS TO BE SEARCHED: 1633 Locust Street, 2nd fl. front. PROBABLE CAUSE AND/OR REASONABLE GROUNDS: On 12/13/70 at approx. 2:10 A.M. affiant received information that the above named defendant did have in his apartment approximately thirty pounds of marijuana. The said informant stated that on 12/13/70 at approximately 11:59 p. m. he had an occasion to be inside the above location and did observe numerous persons entering the above location and hand to the above $200 in U.S. currency at which time the subject would go into his bedroom and upon returning hand to the persons a brick of ground green weed weighing approximately one pound. As a result of this information I set up on 12/14/70 between 2:00 A.M. and 4:00 A.M. a surveillance at which time I observed approx. (5) FIVE persons enter the location and after staying a short period of time, leave carrying a brown bag. Approx. TWO (2) of these persons were known to me as drug users. Therefore, I do believe and have probable cause to believe that narcotics are being stored, dispensed, and used at the above location and that a search of the premises is warranted at this time. Informant has been responsible for six arrests resulting in four convictions with two persons awaiting court action.””
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.