331 Pa. Super. 307 - Commonwealth v. Smalis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(a) A defendant may challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction of one or more of the offenses charged by a:”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Zoller · Smalis v. Pennsylvania

2. “(a) A defendant may challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction of one or more of the offenses charged by a: (2) motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence; (3) motion for judgment of acquittal filed within ten (10) days after the jury has been discharged without agreeing upon a verdict; or (4) motion in arrest of judgment filed within ten (10) days after a finding of guilt.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Zoller

3. “As the trier of fact and law, the court was not satisfied, after considering all of the facts together with all reasonable inferences which the Commonwealth's evidence tended to prove, that there was sufficient evidence from which it could be concluded that either of the defendants was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of setting or causing to be set the fire in question.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smalis v. Pennsylvania