Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 245 Pa. Super. 487 - Commonwealth v. Jones

245 Pa. Super. 487 - Commonwealth v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
May 2004
most recently cited

45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently May 2004 · most notably Commonwealth v. Mason (1985), 250 Pa. Super. 116 - Commonwealth v. Jones (1977)

45 state decisions

1901977198019902000decided

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 Mapp v. Ohio · Weeks v. United States · McNabb v. United States · Commonwealth v. Campana · Commonwealth v. Milliken

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

  1. “In the present case, defendant has not cited any authority enabling either the lower court or this court to order the suppression of evidence simply because the inventory prepared incident to seizure of the evidence was not verified. There is no rule conferring such authority. Neither does it appear that there has been any violation of defendant’s constitutional rights; defendant does not contend that the search warrant in question was obtained without probable cause, or that it was improperly executed. In these circumstances, we find ourselves unable to uphold the lower court’s order suppressing the evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “An inventory of the items seized shall be made by the law enforcement officer serving a search warrant. The inventory shall be made in the presence of the person from whose possession or premises the property was taken, when feasible, or otherwise in the presence of at least one witness. The inventory shall be verified by said officer.”
    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.