Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 347 Pa. Super. 256 - Commonwealth v. Underwood

347 Pa. Super. 256 - Commonwealth v. Underwood’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
2
states following
May 2009
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently May 2009 · most notably 379 Pa. Super. 402 - Commonwealth v. Kubiac (1988), 396 Pa. Super. 92 - Commonwealth v. Thomas (1990)

43 state decisions

220198519902000decided

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 Houltin v. United States · Commonwealth v. Hickman · Commonwealth v. Boyle · Commonwealth v. Cruz · Man O' War Racing Ass'n v. State Horse Racing Commission

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

  1. “[T]he introduction of out-of-court statements for the purpose of showing that based on information contained in the statements, the police followed a certain course of conduct that led to the defendant's arrest [is proper].”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In criminal cases, an arresting or investigating officer should not be put in the false position of seeming just to have happened upon the scene; he should be allowed some explanation of his presence and conduct. His testimony that he acted “upon information received,” or words to that effect, should be sufficient. Nevertheless, cases abound in which the officer is allowed to relate historical aspects of the case, replete with hearsay statements in the form of complaints and reports, on the ground that he was entitled to give the information upon which he acted. The need for the evidence is slight, the likelihood of misuse great.”
    2 later decisions 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.