Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 Pa. Super. 460 - Commonwealth v. Quartman

253 Pa. Super. 460 - Commonwealth v. Quartman’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
April 2020
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably 290 Pa. Super. 254 - Commonwealth v. Hutchinson (1981), 280 Pa. Super. 1 - Commonwealth v. Clark (1981)

36 state decisions

210197819801990200020102020decided

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 Luck v. United States · Commonwealth v. Bighum · Commonwealth v. Amos · Commonwealth v. Maloney · Commonwealth v. Turner

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

  1. “"Had counsel desired curative instructions in the instant case, he could have requested them. It is clear that counsel should likewise be permitted to request that the court not give curative instructions sua sponte. In hindsight, counsel's decision to forego curative instructions may prove to have been a tactical error; it is likewise irremediable. In every case, it is a tactical decision to be made by defense counsel, and the rendering of an unfavorable verdict should not entitle a defendant, who did not elect to protect himself to the maximum in his first trial, to an automatic retrial." 253 Pa.Super. at 464 , 385 A.2d at 431-32 (emphasis added).”
    3 later decisions 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.