316 Pa. Super. 240 - Commonwealth v. Lark’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2005
18 state decisions
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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Commonwealth v. Kichline · Commonwealth v. Yount · Commonwealth. v. Hoss · Commonwealth v. Coccioletti
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our responsibility on review is “to determine whether the record supports the factual findings of the court below and the legitimacy of the inferences and legal conclusions drawn from those findings.” ... In making this determination, this Court will consider only the evidence of the prosecution’s witnesses and so much of the evidence for the defense as, fairly read in the context of the record as a whole, remains uncontradicted.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A weapon shown to have been in a defendant’s possession may be properly admitted evidence even though it cannot be identified positively as the weapon used in committing a crime; it may tend to prove that the defendant had a weapon similar to the one used. Any uncertainty that the weapon is not the actual weapon used in the crime, goes to the weight of such evidence. Commonwealth v. Coccioletti, 493 Pa. 103 , 425 A.2d 387 (1981); Commonwealth v. Royster, 472 Pa. 581 , 372 A.2d 1194 (1977); Commonwealth v. Yount, 455 Pa. 303 , 314 A.2d 242 (1974).”
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.