295 Pa. Super. 61 - Commonwealth v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

32 state decisions

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

1. “In short, the tendering of a guilty plea triggers immediately the guilt-determining process, and trial thereupon commences for purposes of determining compliance with Rule 1100. It matters not whether the trial court accepts the guilty plea immediately or takes it under advisement in order to study further the terms of the plea bargain and prepare for sentencing.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 323 Pa. Super. 418 - Commonwealth v. Margetas · 324 Pa. Super. 403 - Commonwealth v. Margetas

2. “(b) For the purpose of this Rule, trial shall be deemed to commence on the date the trial judge calls the case to trial, or the defendant tenders a plea of guilty or nolo contendere.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 323 Pa. Super. 418 - Commonwealth v. Margetas · 324 Pa. Super. 403 - Commonwealth v. Margetas

3. “The decision in Cox is inconsistent with the other decisions of this Court and also with the objectives of Rule 1100. When determining the commencement of trial under Rule 1100, there is no substantive difference between accepting a negotiated plea of guilty and deferring sentence for a presentence investigation and taking the plea under advisement and deferring sentence for the same type of investigation. In either event, that stage of the proceedings has been reached which points directly and immediately to a final adjudication of guilt. By tendering a plea of guilty, the defendant has formally admitted guilt and has made it unnecessary that guilt or innocence be determined by an adversary trial proceeding. In both instances, the defendant’s formal admission of guilt has made it unnecessary and impractical for the Commonwealth to attempt other proceedings to achieve a substantive determination of guilt. In both instances, the Commonwealth has brought the defendant before the court, where a final judgment of sentence can be imposed. Regardless of whether the guilty plea is accepted or taken under advisement, appellant must be allowed to withdraw his plea if the trial court is unable to accept the terms of a negotiated plea bargain.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 304 Pa. Super. 258 - Commonwealth v. Whittall