367 Pa. Super. 190 - Commonwealth v. Long’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently February 2007 · most notably Commonwealth v. Hill (1999), 386 Pa. Super. 29 - Commonwealth v. Jackson (1989)
31 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 Batson v. Kentucky · 299 Pa. Super. 64 - Commonwealth v. Sanford · Commonwealth v. Woodward · 325 Pa. Super. 401 - Commonwealth v. Hamm · 356 Pa. Super. 64 - Commonwealth v. McKendrick
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The final claim made by Appellant is a bald allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel. Issue number nine states: “Did the defendant fail to have effective assistance of counsel at his trial?”. In the Summary of Argument and Argument portion of Appellant’s Brief, Appellant attempts to list numerous examples of trial counsel’s ineffectiveness. Without citation to the record or supporting case law, Appellant asserts that his counsel was ineffective for failing to submit or argue a suppression or pretrial omnibus motion, failing to object to the introduction of documents at trial, failing to impeach witnesses, failing to seek the recusal of the trial judge, failing to call all possible defense witnesses and failing to move for the dismissal of all indictments. Appellant also submits that his attorney was unprepared to argue Appellant’s case on the day of scheduled argument for Post Trial Motions. As with the other allegations of ineffectiveness, Appellant does not offer any support for his position. He does not indicate what arguments should have been made, or the merits of the matters he wished to present to the trial court. Since Appellant has failed to properly develop these issues, we will not consider the merits thereof. Commonwealth v. Sanford, 299 Pa.Super. 64 , 445 A.2d 149 (1982); Pa.R.A.P., Rule 2119(a).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[s]eparate trials would have required the duplication of testimony and evidence and would have caused the court to have `incurred the burdensome cost of two lengthy trials.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the Commonwealth, by opposing his motion to sever his case from his co-defendant's, failed to demonstrate due diligence.”
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.