391 Pa. Super. 154 - Commonwealth v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
August 2003
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Burks v. United States · Green v. United States · United States v. Jorn · Serfass v. United States · Mullins Coal Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 112. Former prosecution before court lacking jurisdiction or when fraudulently procured by the defendant A prosecution is not a bar within the meaning of section 109 of this title (relating to when prosecution barred by former prosecution for same offense) through section 111 of this title (relating to when prosecution barred by former prosecution in another jurisdiction) under any of the following circumstances: (1) The former prosecution was before a court which lacked jurisdiction over the defendant or the offense. (2) The former prosecution was procured by the defendant without the knowledge of the appropriate prosecuting officer and with the purpose of avoiding the sentence which might otherwise be imposed. (3) The former prosecution resulted in a judgment of conviction which was held invalid in a subsequent proceeding on a writ of habeas corpus, coram nobis or similar process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“§ 110. When prosecution barred by former prosecution for different offense Although a prosecution is for a violation of a different provision of the statutes than a former prosecution or is based on different facts, it is barred by such former prosecution under the following circumstances: (1) The former prosecution resulted in an acquittal or in a conviction ... and the subsequent prosecution is for: (ii) any offense based on the same conduct or arising from the same criminal episode, if such offense was known to the appropriate prosecuting officer at the time of the commencement of the first trial and was within the jurisdiction of a single court unless the court ordered a separate trial of the charge of such offense; ...”
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.