369 Pa. Super. 381 - Commonwealth v. Cauto’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably 398 Pa. Super. 21 - Commonwealth v. Vanderlin (1990), 427 Pa. Super. 566 - Commonwealth v. Maris (1993)
30 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 Florida v. Royer · Commonwealth Ex Rel. Washington v. Maroney · Batson v. Kentucky · Commonwealth v. Pierce · Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we 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. (Citation omitted). Moreover, when the evidence viewed in this manner supports the factual finding of the suppression court this Honorable Court can reverse only if there is an error in the legal conclusion drawn from those factual findings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Even if the prosecutor has made no promises, either on the present case or on other pending criminal matters, the witness may hope for favorable treatment from the prosecutor if the witness presently testifies in a way that is helpful to the prosecution. And if that possibility exists, the jury should know about it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Serious damage to the strength of the State’s case would have been a real possibility had petitioner been allowed to pursue [the bias] inquiry. In this setting we conclude that the right of confrontation is paramount to the State’s policy of protecting a juvenile offender. [[Image here]] The State’s policy interest in protecting the confidentiality of a juvenile offender’s record cannot require yielding of so vital a constitutional right as the effective cross-examination for bias in an adverse witness.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wood v. State
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.