Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 PASUPER 25 - Commonwealth v. Wortham

Commonwealth v. Wortham’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
October 1981
most recently cited

20 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Commonwealth v. Yount · Commonwealth v. Bonomo · Commonwealth v. Ford · Commonwealth v. Jones

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.

  1. “Positive testimony that the challenged item is the actual weapon used in the commission of the crime is not required prior to its introduction into evidence... All that is demanded is that a proper foundation be laid revealing circumstances sufficient to justify an inference of the likelihood of the weapon’s use in the course of crime. . . Furthermore, the admission of such demonstrative evidence is a matter within the discretion of the trial judge, and absent an abuse of discretion, that decision will not be disturbed. Commonwealth v. Wortham, supra, 235 Pa.Super. at 31 and at 763, 342 A.2d 759 .”
    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.