289 Pa. Super. 411 - Commonwealth v. Walton’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
28 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Riggins · 265 Pa. Super. 305 - Commonwealth v. Wicks · Commonwealth v. Smith · 275 Pa. Super. 373 - Commonwealth v. Doyle · 259 Pa. Super. 527 - Commonwealth v. Wareham
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in exercising its discretion in imposing sentence there must be some evidence that the court has carefully considered the weight to be given to each of the grounds set forth in the applicable sections dealing with probation, partial confinement and total confinement.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We note, however, that “no case has held that the Sentencing Code, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 1301, et seq., states the exclusive and inflexible criteria in the sentencing process. Indeed, our cases hold that a statement of reasons should not be held insufficient when it is apparent that the court considered and applied the Code even though it made no explicit reference to those guidelines.” Commonwealth v. Zimmerman, 282 Pa.Super. 286 , 422 A.2d 1119, 1125 (1980).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.