252 Pa. Super. 387 - Commonwealth v. Dandy’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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

1. “While under Section (d) of the Rule, various time periods may be excluded from the 180 day period, if due to the unavailability of the defendant or his counsel or if due to defense continuances in excess of thirty days, such exclusions are not proper in the instant case for two reasons. First, the Commonwealth never argued defense caused delays in the argument before the lower court on appellant’s Rule 1100 motion. Rather, the Commonwealth only noted that there had been delays . . . Second, the Commonwealth’s contention must fail because the record provides no support for the claim that some seventy days of delay are attributable to appellant and should be excluded from the running of the time limit under the Rule. 252 Pa. at 391, 381 A.2d at 974 .'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 256 Pa. Super. 488 - Commonwealth v. Garbett

2. “In determining the period for commencement of trial, there shall be excluded therefrom such period of delay at any stage of the proceedings as results from: (1) The unavailability of the defendant or his attorney; (2) Any continuance in excess of thirty (30) days granted at the request of the defendant or his attorney, provided that only the period beyond the thirtieth (30th) day shall be so excluded.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 262 Pa. Super. 258 - Commonwealth v. Smith