260 Pa. Super. 420 - Commonwealth v. Mascaro’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably 388 Pa. Super. 561 - Commonwealth v. Savage (1989), 319 Pa. Super. 479 - Commonwealth v. Abbott (1983)
30 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 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002)
Relies on Commonwealth v. Mills · Commonwealth v. Grazier · Commonwealth v. Studebaker
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““When conduct constitutes an offense within the concurrent jurisdiction of this Commonwealth and of the United States or another state, a prosecution in any such other jurisdiction is a bar to a subsequent prosecution in this Commonwealth under the following circumstances: (1) The first prosecution resulted in an acquittal or in a conviction as defined in section 109 of this title (relating to when prosecution barred by former prosecution for same offense) and the subsequent prosecution is based on the same conduct unless: (i) the offense of which the defendant was formerly convicted or acquitted and the offense for which he is subsequently prosecuted each requires proof of a fact not required by the other and the law defining each of such offenses is intended to prevent a substantially different harm or evil; or (ii) the second offense was not consummated when the former trial began.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““[t]o hold otherwise would be to apply the ‘interest analysis’ test and § 111 in such a narrow and limiting manner so that dual prosecutions would effectively be barred only where exact crimes match exact dates — crime for crime and date for daté. The Federal Mail Fraud ( 18 U.S.C.A. § 1341 ) and False Statement ( 18 U.S.C.A. § 1001 ) statutes are designed to guard against theft and fraud. So too are the state statútes — Theft by Deception (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3922), Deceptive Business Practices (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4107), and Unsworn Falsifications to Authorities (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4904). Similarly, the inchoate crime of Criminal Conspiracy (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 903) is an offense of the same grade and degree as the most serious of its criminal objectives — here, theft and fraud. The state and federal statutes employed here are designed to protect a similar governmental interest; contrariwise would be ‘form over substance.’ ” Id., 260 Pa.Super. at 427 , 394 A.2d at 1001-02 (emphasis in original).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[HJenceforth in Pennsylvania, a second prosecution and imposition of punishment for the same offense will not be permitted unless it appears from the record that the interests of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the jurisdiction which initially prosecuted and imposed punishment are substantially different. In other words, if it appears that the interests of this Commonwealth were not sufficiently protected in the initial prosecution, then a second prosecution and imposition of additional punishment in Pennsylvania will be allowed.”
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.