Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 278 Pa. Super. 453 - Commonwealth v. Wendowski

278 Pa. Super. 453 - Commonwealth v. Wendowski’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
6
states following
November 2022
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably Matthews v. State (1985), State v. Sullivan (1982)

1 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

9019801990200020102020decided

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 Burns v. United States · Commonwealth v. Vivian · United States v. Ross · Martin v. State · Coffey v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “If, at any time before the defendant has completed the maximum period of probation, or before he has begun service of his probation, he should commit offenses of such nature as to demonstrate to the court that he is unworthy of probation and that the granting of the same would not be in subservience to the ends of justice and the best interests of the public, or the defendant, the court could revoke or change the order of probation. A defendant on probation has no contract with the court. He is still a person convicted of crime, and the expressed intent of the Court to have him under probation beginning at a future time does not “change his position from the possession of a privilege to the enjoyment of a right.” Burns v. United States, 287 U.S. 216, 222 , 53 S.Ct. 154, 156 , 77 L.Ed. 266, 269 (1932).”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “may and should be construed for revocation purposes as including the term beginning at the time probation is granted. Otherwise, having been granted probation a defendant could commit criminal acts with impunity - as far as revocation of probation is concerned - until he commenced actual service of the probationary period.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.