341 Pa. Super. 261 - Commonwealth v. White’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably 344 Pa. Super. 108 - Commonwealth v. Williams (1985), 362 Pa. Super. 176 - Commonwealth v. Westcott (1987)
62 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 Blockburger v. United States · North Carolina v. Pearce · United States v. Wilson · Illinois v. Vitale · Commonwealth v. Riggins
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is well settled that Pennsylvania trial judges are vested with broad sentencing discretion with which the appellate courts will not interfere absent manifest abuse. Commonwealth v. Green, 494 Pa. 406 , 431 A.2d 918 (1981); Commonwealth v. Black, 321 Pa.Super. 44 , 467 A.2d 884 (1983). In order to constitute an abuse of discretion, a sentence must either exceed the statutory limits or be so manifestly excessive as to constitute an abuse of discretion. Commonwealth v. Palmer, 315 Pa.Super. 601 , 462 A.2d 755 (1983); Commonwealth v. Scarborough, 313 Pa.Super. 521 , 460 A.2d 310 (1983). ‘A trial judge is required to state on the record his reasons for the particular sentence imposed and these articulated reasons should reflect the judge’s consideration of the sentencing code, the circumstances of the offense, and the character of the offender.’ Commonwealth v. Kane, 315 Pa.Super. 212 , 461 A.2d 1246, 1250-51 (1983) (footnote omitted). The statement of the court at the sentencing proceedings need not specifically cite or include the language of the sentencing code; it need only demonstrate that the court has considered the factors specified in the code. Id., 315 Pa.Superior Ct. at 221, 461 A.2d at 1251 ; Commonwealth v. Franklin, 301 Pa.Super. 17 , 446 A.2d 1313 (1982).”
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.