234 Pa. Super. 52 - Commonwealth v. Mott’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently August 1990
20 state decisions
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 Sherman v. United States · United States v. Watson · United States v. Frederick W. Klosterman. United States v. John R. Deeney, Jr. United States v. Joseph A. Stafford · 196 Pa. Super. 97 - Commonwealth v. Conway · Commonwealth v. Klein
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[w]hile it is true that under normal circumstances entrapment is usually a jury question, where the evidence points to only one conclusion the question may be decided as a matter of law, just as any other factual issues admitting of only one conclusion."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(a) General rule. — A public law enforcement official or a person acting in cooperation with such an official perpetrates an entrapment if for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of an .offense, he induces or encourages another person to engage in conduct constituting such offense by either: (1) making knowingly false representations designed to induce the belief that such conduct is not prohibited; or (2) employing methods of persuasion or inducement which create a substantial risk that such an offense will be committed by persons other than those who are ready to commit it.” 18 Pa.C.S. § 313.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The charge must be given, however unreasonable the judge would consider a verdict in favor of the defendant to be, when the accused shows (1) evidence that the Government initiated the crime, regardless of the amount of pressure applied to the defendant, and (2) any evidence negating the defendant’s propensity to commit the crime. U. S. v. Watson, 489 F.2d 504, 509 (3d Cir. 1973).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.