265 Pa. Super. 494 - Commonwealth v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably United States v. Preston (1990), 431 Pa. Super. 453 - Commonwealth v. Swerdlow (1994)
2 federal appellate · 47 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 Commonwealth v. Clair · Commonwealth v. Blair · Commonwealth v. Kloiber · Commonwealth v. Sullivan · Commonwealth v. Roux
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Definition of conspiracy.—A person is guilty of conspiracy with another person or persons to commit a crime if with the intent of promoting or facilitating its commission he: (1) agrees with such other person or persons that they or one or more of them will engage in conduct which constitutes such crime or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime; or (2) agrees to aid such other person or persons in the planning or commission of such crime or of an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“‘Proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the identity of the accused as the person who committed the crime is essential to a conviction.’ Commonwealth v. Hickman, 453 Pa. 427, 430 , 309 A.2d 564, 566 (1973). Where a witness’ opportunity to identify the accused is good and his identification remains positive and unshaken even after cross-examination, his testimony is clearly sufficient proof of identity. Id. Accord, Commonwealth v. Kloiber, 378 Pa. 412 , 106 A.2d 820 (1954).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Among the circumstances relevant, but not sufficient by themselves, to prove a corrupt confederacy are (1) association between alleged conspirators, ...; (2) knowledge of the commission of a crime, ...; (3) presence at the scene of the crime, ...; and (4) in some situations, participation in the object of the conspiracy,____”
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.