359 Pa. Super. 433 - Commonwealth v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably 364 Pa. Super. 604 - Commonwealth v. Espada (1987), 405 Pa. Super. 17 - Commonwealth v. Patterson (1991)
52 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 Terry v. Ohio · Adams v. Williams · United States v. Sharpe · Cady v. Dombrowski · Commonwealth v. Hicks
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our function on review of an order denying a motion to suppress is to determine whether the factual findings of the lower court are supported by the record. In making this determination, we are to consider only the evidence of the prosecution’s witnesses and so much of the evidence for the defense as, fairly read in the context of the record as a whole, remains uncontradicted. If when so viewed, the evidence supports the factual findings, we are bound by such findings and may only reverse if the legal conclusions drawn therefrom are in error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Fourth Amendment does not require a policeman who lacks the precise level of information necessary for probable cause to arrest to simply shrug his shoulders and allow a crime to occur or a criminal to escape. On the contrary, Terry 2 recognizes that it may be the essence of good police work to adopt an intermediate response. A brief stop of a suspicious individual, in order to. determine his identity or to maintain the status quo momentarily while obtaining more information, may be most reasonable in light of the facts known to the officer at the time.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It merely requires that the facts available to the officer would “warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief,” ... that certain items may be contraband or stolen property or useful as evidence of a crime; it does not demand any showing that such a belief be correct or more likely true than false. A “practical, non-technical” proba bility that incriminating evidence is involved is all that is required.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.