240 Pa. Super. 495 - Commonwealth v. Bartman’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 1993 · most notably Commonwealth v. Dreibelbis (1981), 323 Pa. Super. 92 - Commonwealth v. Thiel (1983)
32 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 223 Pa. Super. 60 - Commonwealth v. Lockhart · Commonwealth v. Simione · Commonwealth v. Koch · Commonwealth v. Senk · Del Hoyo v. New York
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Appellant’s final contention relates to the bill of particulars filed by the Commonwealth. Appellant contends that the court erred in allowing the Commonwealth to call witnesses beyond those listed in the bill of particulars. However, this contention is negated by the fact that the bill of particulars states that “[t]he names and addresses of all witnesses intended to be called by the Commonwealth for the case in chief as endorsed on the Indictment, are as follows: . . . and such other witnesses as deemed advisable by the Commonwealth.” Furthermore, as will be developed in the next section, the testimony of two of the three witnesses not named in the bill of particulars was prejudicial only to appellant-Bartman. The testimo ny of the third witness was not sufficiently prejudicial to require reversal”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(3) attempts to cause or intentionally or knowingly causes bodily injury to a police officer making or attempting to make a lawful arrest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Angelucci
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.