252 Pa. Super. 357 - Commonwealth v. Waters’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently October 1992 · most notably 315 Pa. Super. 212 - Commonwealth v. Kane (1983), 262 Pa. Super. 253 - Commonwealth v. Young (1978)
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 Morrissey v. Brewer · Moody v. Daggett · 248 Pa. Super. 552 - Commonwealth v. Holmes · 218 Pa. Super. 188 - Commonwealth v. White · Commonwealth v. Duff
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.
““ ‘The requirement of a speedy revocation hearing embodied in the Rule is nothing more than a restatement of the doctrine developed by our courts that a revocation hearing must be held with “reasonable promptness” after probation officials know or reasonably should have known of the violation.’ Commonwealth v. Lipton, 238 Pa.Super. 124, 135-36 , 352 A.2d 521, 526 (1975) (dissenting opinion by Hoffman J.); see also Commonwealth v. Holmes, [ 248 Pa.Super. 552 , 375 A.2d 379 (1977)]; Commonwealth v. Parker, 244 Pa.Super. 113 , 366 A.2d 941 (1976). ‘Where the alleged violation consists of the commission of another crime during the original period of probation or parole, “[i]t is sufficient that the court which imposed the probation [or parole] should act promptly after the [conviction] . .” ’ Commonwealth v. Holmes, supra, 248 Pa.Super. at 557 , 375 A.2d at 381 quoting Commonwealth v. Duff, 201 Pa.Super. 387, 395 , 192 A.2d 258, 262 (1964). “The sole question in every case of this type is whether the delay from the date of conviction to the date of revocation was reasonable. Commonwealth v. Parker, supra. In assessing reasonableness, we must consider the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay and the prejudice to the defendant. Commonwealth v. Holmes, supra; Commonwealth v. Lipton, supra; Commonwealth v. Duff, supra.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Whenever a defendant has been placed on probation or parole, the judge shall not revoke such probation or parole as allowed by law unless there has been a hearing held as speedily as possible at which the defendant is present and represented by counsel and there has been a finding of record that the defendant violated a condition of probation or parole." (emphasis added).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“is nothing more than a restatement of the doctrine developed by our courts that a revocation hearing must be held with reasonable promptness after probation officials know or reasonably should have known of the violation.”
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.