392 Pa. Super. 583 - Commonwealth v. Ramos’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably 421 Pa. Super. 233 - Commonwealth v. Torres (1992), 2000 Pa. Super. 293 - Commonwealth v. Aguado (2000)
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 Commonwealth v. MacOlino · United States v. Valencia-Roldan · United States v. Carter · 368 Pa. Super. 327 - Commonwealth v. Pearsall · 296 Pa. Super. 43 - Commonwealth v. Bagley
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.
“In addition to these considerations, we further recognize that all the facts and circumstances surrounding possession are relevant in making a determination of whether contraband was possessed with the intent to deliver. Expert opinion testimony is admissible concerning whether the facts surrounding the possession of controlled substances are consistent with an intent to deliver rather than with an intent to possess it for personal use. Under Pennsylvania law, intent to deliver may be inferred from possession of a large quantity of controlled substances. Similarly, the absence of intent to deliver may be inferred where only a small amount of the controlled substance was discovered. However, ‘the amount [of [the] controlled substance] involved is not necessarily crucial to establishing an inference of possession with the intent to deliver, if ... other facts are present.’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth as verdict winner and drawing all proper inferences favorable to the Commonwealth, it must be determined whether the [fact-finder] could reasonably have found all of the elements of the crime to have been established beyond a reasonable doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“but one of many factors to be considered in determining whether possession was for sale or delivery, or for personal use.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Zunker
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.