Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 309 PASUPER 392 - Commonwealth v. Schultz

Commonwealth v. Schultz’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
July 1984
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth v. Ingram · Commonwealth v. Shaffer · Commonwealth v. Willis · Commonwealth v. Dilbeck · Commonwealth v. Minor

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

  1. “[appellee] was never informed that theft or attempted theft is a necessary element of the crime, and, thus, the court could not determine whether [appellee] knowingly and intelligently entered the plea.”
    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.