Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 286 Pa. Super. 146 - Commonwealth v. Eackles

286 Pa. Super. 146 - Commonwealth v. Eackles’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Commonwealth v. Goldhammer (1985), 379 Pa. Super. 402 - Commonwealth v. Kubiac (1988)

44 state decisions

3101981199020002010decided

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 Culombe v. Connecticut · Commonwealth v. Hickman · Commonwealth v. Starkes · Commonwealth v. Stockard · 282 Pa. Super. 100 - Commonwealth v. Bidner

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

  1. “(c) Exceptions.—If the period prescribed in subsection (b) of this section has expired, a prosecution may nevertheless be commenced for: (1) Any offense a material element of which is either fraud or a breach of fiduciary obligation within one year after discovery of the offense by an aggrieved party or by a person who has a legal duty to represent an aggrieved party and who is himself not a party to the offense, but in no case shall this paragraph extend the period of limitation otherwise applicable by more than three years. (Emphasis added.)”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “An element that does not relate exclusively to the statute of limitations, jurisdiction, venue or to any other matter similarly unconnected with: (1) the harm or evil incident to conduct, sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense; or (2) the existence of a justification or excuse for such conduct.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““The test of voluntariness is whether the confession was the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice by its maker. Culombe v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568, 602 , 81 S.Ct. 1860, 1879 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037, 1057 (1961). In determining the voluntariness of a statement, the totality of the circumstances must be considered. Commonwealth v. Starkes, 461 Pa. 178, 184 , 335 A.2d 698, 701 (1975). More specifically, there must be considered the age of the accused; his education level; his inteeligence; his physical state; the duration and method of interrogation; the conditions of detention; the advice given to him concerning his constitutional rights; and any other circumstances pertinent to the inquiry.” Commonwealth v. Eackles, 286 Pa.Super. 146 at 151 , 428 A.2d 614 at 617 .”
    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.