352 Pa. Super. 15 - Commonwealth v. Muroski’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 2005 Pa. Super. 211 - In Re Private Criminal Complaint of Wilson (2005), 430 Pa. Super. 83 - Kroen v. Bedway Security Agency, Inc. (1993)
29 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 Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Blackledge v. Perry · Linda R. S. v. Richard D. · Cannon v. United States · Holt v. Alleghany Corp.
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[E]ven if the facts recited in the complaint make out a prima facie case, the district attorney cannot blindly bring charges, particularly where an investigation may cause him to question their validity. Forcing the prosecutor, to bring charges in every instance where a complaint sets out a prima facie case would compel the district attorney to bring cases he suspects, or has concluded via investigation, are meritless. The public prosecutor is duty bound to bring only those cases that are appropriate for prosecution. This duty continues throughout a criminal proceeding and obligates the district attorney to withdraw charges when he concludes, after investigation, that the prosecution lacks a legal basis. ., .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““Obviously, what constitutes a gross abuse of discretion cannot be stated by a simple formula. Everything will depend on the particular facts of the case and the district attorney’s articulated reasons for acting, or failing to act, in the particular circumstances. For example, a court may find a gross abuse of discretion in a district attorney’s pattern of discriminatory prosecution,... or in retaliatory prosecutions based on personal or other impermissible motives.... Similarly a district attorney may be found to have grossly abused his discretion for his blanket refusal to prosecute for violations of a particular statute,... or for refusing to prosecute solely because the accused is a public official.” Id. at 32-33 , 506 A.2d at 1322-1323 . (citations omitted)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Rule 506. Approval of Private Complaints (A) When the affiant is not a law enforcement officer, the complaint shall be submitted to an attorney for the Commonwealth, who shall approve or disapprove it without unreasonable delay. (B) If the attorney for the Commonwealth: (1) approves the complaint, the attorney shall indicate this decision on the complaint form and transmit it to the issuing authority; (2) disapproves the complaint, the attorney shall state the reasons on the complaint form and return it to the affiant. Thereafter, the affiant may petition the court of common pleas for review of the decision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.