Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 329 Pa. Super. 196 - Commonwealth v. Mills

329 Pa. Super. 196 - Commonwealth v. Mills’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2022

10 state decisions

6019841990200020102020decided

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 Commonwealth v. Hubbard · Commonwealth v. Lovette · 315 Pa. Super. 256 - Commonwealth v. Holmes · 310 Pa. Super. 39 - Commonwealth v. Griffin · 309 Pa. Super. 415 - Commonwealth v. Lamb

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

  1. “The essence of the offense of conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. The agreement required for conspiracy can seldom be directly proved, nor need it be. However, a mere association between several alleged co-conspirators or their mere presence at the scene of the crime is not enough to establish that there has been a criminal conspiracy. Among the circumstances which are relevant, but not sufficient by themselves, to prove a corrupt confederation are: (1) an association between alleged conspirators; (2) knowledge of the commission of the crime; (3) presence at the scene of the crime; and (4) in some situations, participation in the object of the conspiracy. The presence of such circumstances may furnish a web of evidence linking an accused to an alleged conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt when viewed in conjunction with each other and in the context in which they occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) Definition of conspiracy, — A person is guilty of conspiracy with another person or persons to commit a crime if with the intent of promoting or facilitating its commission he: (1) agrees with such other person or persons that they or one or more of them will engage in conduct which constitutes such crime or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime;”
    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.