388 Pa. Super. 82 - Commonwealth v. Bruner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

57 state decisions

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

1. “A successful claim of counsel’s ineffectiveness must address three inquiries: (1) whether the underlying claim is of arguable merit; (2) whether counsel had any reasonable basis for his chosen course of conduct; and (3) whether the course of conduct worked to the client’s prejudice, i.e., had an adverse effect on the outcome of the proceedings. Commonwealth v. Davis, 518 Pa. 77 , 541 A.2d 315 (1988). The law presumes that counsel is effective and the burden of establishing ineffective assistance is on the appellant. Commonwealth v. McNeil, 506 Pa. 607 , 487 A.2d 802 (1985).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Zorn · 393 Pa. Super. 277 - Commonwealth v. McLaughlin

2. “The decision of whether to declare a mistrial of a criminal prosecution is within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. Commonwealth v. Larkins, 340 Pa.Super. 56 , 489 A.2d 837 (1985). The decision depends on whether or not improper evidence was admitted at trial that would so prejudice the fact finder that it would be unable to remain impartial, thereby prejudicing the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. The admission of testimony from which a jury could infer past criminal conduct has been held to be reversible error. Commonwealth v. Phillips, 373 Pa.Super. 193 , 540 A.2d 933 (1988). Reversal is not warranted, however, unless the record indicates that prejudice resulted from the testimony. Commonwealth v. Allen, 448 Pa. 177 , 292 A.2d 373 (1972). Mere “passing references” to criminal activity do not necessitate the granting of a mistrial unless prejudice results from the reference. Commonwealth v. Thomas, 361 Pa.Super. 1 , 521 A.2d 442 , appeal denied 516 Pa. 617 , 531 A.2d 1119 (1987).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 412 Pa. Super. 120 - Commonwealth v. Servich

3. “The standard for establishing a chain of custody for admission of physical evidence was stated by the court in Commonwealth v. Hudson, 489 Pa. 620 , 414 A.2d 1381 (1980): The admission of demonstrative evidence is a matter committed to the discretion of the court ... Furthermore, there is no requirement that the Commonwealth establish the sanctity of its exhibits beyond a moral certainty ... Every hypothetical possibility of tampering need not be eliminated; it is sufficient that the evidence, direct or circumstantial, establishes a reasonable inference that the identity and condition of the exhibit remained unimpaired until it was surrendered to the trial court ... Finally, physical evidence may be properly admitted despite gaps in testimony regarding its custody____”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 395 Pa. Super. 137 - Commonwealth v. Bartley