Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 367 Pa. Super. 370 - Commonwealth v. Rauser

367 Pa. Super. 370 - Commonwealth v. Rauser’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
June 1989
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Anders v. California · Douglas v. People of State of California · Pennsylvania v. Finley · Ross v. Moffitt · Commonwealth v. McClendon

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

  1. “First, counsel must conduct a thorough and comprehensive review of the record and relevant legal authority. Second, if the attorney in good faith and in his honest professional opinion believes after such a review that an appeal would be frivolous, he shall so advise the trial court and petition the trial court for leave to withdraw. Third, concurrent with his petition to withdraw, counsel shall inform his client of his petition to withdraw and the reasons therefor. Fourth, counsel shall advise his client of his right to another attorney and his right to raise issues on a pro se basis, as well as his right to an appeal. The next step is taken by the trial court. The trial court is to conduct a full examination of all the proceedings, and if it determines that the case is frivolous, should grant the petition to withdraw.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Basic principles of American jurisprudence dictate that cases in conflict with the holding of the United States Supreme Court in Finley ... need no longer be followed. In short, a so-called Anders brief need no longer be filed in a PCHA appeal when effective counsel has determined that an appeal would be wholly frivolous. This rule is a proper balance between the duty to protect the rights of the individual and the avoidance of forcing attorneys into an ethical dilemma by requiring them to pursue a frivolous appeal.”
    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.