Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 239 PASUPER 505 - Commonwealth v. Markle

Commonwealth v. Markle’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
January 1997
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 1997

11 state decisions

40197619801990decided

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 Barker v. Wingo · Commonwealth v. Allen · Commonwealth v. Hamilton · Commonwealth v. Coyle · Commonwealth v. Homeyer

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

  1. “In the instant case, the Commonwealth introduced testimony which could result in only a single inference: that appellant or someone under his control, had threatened the life of his principal accuser. If some other inference could result, the evidence would be totally irrelevant. In the interests of fairness, it must be presumed that the effect of this testimony was “to predispose the minds of the jurors to believe the accused guilty, and thus effectually .to strip him of the presumption of innocence.” Commonwealth v. Trowery, 211 Pa.Super. 171, 174 , 235 A.2d 171, 172 (1967). We cannot assume that the jury, once having inferred that appellant had threatened to kill Hendricks, could strike this testimony from their minds and render an impartial verdict.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Q. Do you know whether or not Mr. Hendricks, as a result of his cooperation with the police, has ever had any threats made upon his life? A. He has. 239 Pa.Super. at 513 , 361 A.2d at 829 .”
    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.