247 Pa. Super. 99 - Commonwealth v. Kindness’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably Gilles v. Davis (2005), 339 Pa. Super. 32 - Commonwealth v. Hernandez (1985)
2 federal appellate · 67 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
Applies 2 U.S.C. § 431 (§ 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971)
Relies on Mapp v. Ohio · Buckley v. Valeo · San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez · Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Snowden v. Hughes
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is undisputed that appellant was excluded from ARD pursuant to a prosecutorial office policy[ the applicability of which was made known to the defendant in the form of two (2) written reasons for exclusion], concurred in by the court below, against the admission of drunken driving cases to ARD. It is thus clear that the law as administered in Dauphin County deals alike with all members of this class.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The authorities are virtually unanimous that the historical power to “nol pros ” belonged at common law solely to the Attorney General and remains an exclusive prosecutorial power in the absence of a state constitutional or statutory provision to the contrary. 371 A.2d at 1349 . 5”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dearborne v. State“(a) Upon motion of the attorney for the Commonwealth, the court may, in open court, order a nolle prosequi notwithstanding the objection of any person.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.