Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 PASUPER 109 - Commonwealth v. Speelman

Commonwealth v. Speelman’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
September 2000
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently September 2000

23 state decisions

1701975198019902000decided

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 Commonwealth v. Campana · 230 Pa. Super. 563 - Commonwealth v. Kloch · Smith v. Clark · Commonwealth v. Cox · Commonwealth v. Ross

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

  1. “[A]nalysis of duplicitous sentence questions has traditionally revolved around the concept of injury to the sovereign, in this case the Commonwealth. One of the purposes of the criminal law is to punish offenses against the Commonwealth, as defined by the Legislature, and it follows that, `[t]he criminal prosecution is for the injury done to the Commonwealth, and not for the injury done to the individual who may, if entitled, obtain redress through a civil action. Where there is but one act of cause of injury, or death of a number of persons, there is but one injury to the Commonwealth, but where the acts or causes are separate, they are separate injuries to the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth ...'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[r]esentencing in no way affects the underlying convictions,”
    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.