Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 234 Pa. Super. 31 - Commonwealth v. Davis

234 Pa. Super. 31 - Commonwealth v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

125
cited by 125 later decisions
10
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

125 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 125 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably Commonwealth v. Brown (1983), 248 Pa. Super. 552 - Commonwealth v. Holmes (1977)

125 state decisions — followed in 10 states

680197519801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · Commonwealth v. Clair · Commonwealth v. Kates · Commonwealth ex rel. Rambeau v. Rundle

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

  1. “"`(a) written notice of the claimed violations of [probation or] parole ; (b) disclosure to [probationer or] parolee of evidence against him; (c) opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence; (d) the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses (unless the hearing officer specifically finds good cause for not allowing confrontation); (e) a "neutral and detached" hearing body such as a traditional parole board, members of which need not be judicial officers or lawyers; and (f) a written statement by the factfinders as to the evidence relied on and reasons for revoking [probation or] parole.'" Gagnon v. Scarpelli, supra, 411 U.S. at 786 , 93 S.Ct. at 1761-62 , quoting Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 489 , 92 S.Ct. 2593, 2604 , 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972) (emphasis added).”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Whenever a defendant has been placed on probation or parole, the judge shall not revoke such probation or parole as allowed by law unless there has been a hearing held as speedily as possible at which the defendant is present and represented by counsel and there has been a finding of record that the defendant violated a condition of probation or parole. . . . ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[A probationer] is entitled to two hearings, one a preliminary hearing at the time of his arrest and detention to determine whether there is a probable cause to believe that he has committed a violation of his . . . [probation] and the other a somewhat more comprehensive hearing prior to the making of a final revocation decision.”
    2 later decisions 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.