356 Pa. Super. 477 - Commonwealth v. Groff’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently November 2015
18 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 Lutwak v. United States · United Mine Workers, Local No. 1854 v. National Labor Relations Board · Commonwealth v. Story · Commonwealth v. Rose · Commonwealth v. Jones
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First .a trial court must determine whether the [demonstrative evidence] is inflammatory. If not, it may be' admitted if it has relevance and can assist the jury’s-understanding of the facts. If the [demonstrative evidence] is inflammatory, the trial court must decide whether or not the [demonstrative evidence is] of such essential evidentiary value that their need clearly outweighs the likelihood of inflaming the minds and passions of the jurors.”
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.