Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 359 Pa. Super. 461 - Commonwealth v. McCormick

359 Pa. Super. 461 - Commonwealth v. McCormick’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
December 2012
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2012 · most notably Danforth v. Minnesota (2008), 4 Va. App. 342 - Taitano v. Commonwealth (1987)

34 state decisions

2101986199020002010decided

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 Illinois v. Gates · Batson v. Kentucky · Stovall v. Denno · Swain v. State of Alabama · United States v. Johnson

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

  1. “The common law approach set forth in U.S. v. Schooner Peggy, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 103 , 2 L.Ed. 49 (1801) is that an appellate court must apply the law as it exists at the time of its decision. Therefore, new decisions always have retrospective application to cases pending at the time of the decision. However, a modified form of the common law approach creates an exception to this rule where the new rule is a “clear break with the past” or where there are constitutional limitations. U.S. v. Johnson, 457 U.S. 537 , 102 S.Ct. 2579 , 73 L.Ed.2d 202 (1982). Alternatively, a court can selectively apply a decision retroactively. Under the selective approach, the court considers: 1) the purpose to be served by the new standard; 2) the extent of reliance by law enforcement authorities on the old standard; and 3) the effect on the administration of justice. Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293 , 87 S.Ct. 1967 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1199 (1967). Where the purpose of the new standard affects the truth finding function, thereby raising serious questions about the accuracy of prior guilty verdicts, the new rule has been given complete retroac tive effect. Williams v. U.S., 401 U.S. 646 , 91 S.Ct. 1148 , 28 L.Ed.2d 388 (1971).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The Batson requirements for establishing a prima facie case of intentional racial discrimination are: 1) that the defendant is a member of a cognizable racial group and that the prosecution used peremptory challenges to remove from the venire members of the defendant’s race; 2) that the defendant can rely on the presumption that peremptory challenges to veniremen permit discrimination by those inclined to do so; and 3) that the facts and relevant circumstances raise the inference that the prosecutor used the peremptory challenges to racially discriminate. Batson, Id., 106 S.Ct. at 1723 . Once these three requirements are satisfied, the burden shifts to the prose cution to explain adequately the racial exclusion. Id., at 1721.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “where an appellate decision overrules' prior law and announces a new principle, unless the decision specifically declares the ruling to be prospective only, the new rule is to be applied retroactively to cases where the issue in question is properly preserved at all stages of adjudication up to and including any direct appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.