340 Pa. Super. 528 - Commonwealth v. Parrish’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably 381 Pa. Super. 606 - Commonwealth v. Hunter (1989), 365 Pa. Super. 562 - Commonwealth v. Coles (1987)
38 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 Smith v. Crouse · Fisher v. United States · Commonwealth v. Riggins · Etchieson v. Texas · Commonwealth v. Martin
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Sentencing is a matter within the sound discretion of the sentencing court, and, generally, will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. “If the sentence imposed is within the statutory limits, there is no abuse of discretion, unless the sentence is so manifestly excessive so as to inflict too severe a punishment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the court must consider the character of the defendant and the particular circumstances of the offense ... and must impose a sentence that is the minimum sentence consistent with the protection of the public, the gravity of the offense, and the rehabilitative needs of the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.