Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 411 Pa. Super. 210 - Commonwealth v. Biddle

411 Pa. Super. 210 - Commonwealth v. Biddle’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
states following
July 2012
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 2012 · most notably 437 Pa. Super. 258 - Commonwealth v. Berryman (1994), Commonwealth v. Vasquez (2000)

27 state decisions

180199120002010decided

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. Wright · 375 Pa. Super. 585 - Commonwealth v. Stewart · 387 Pa. Super. 151 - Commonwealth v. Martorano · 404 Pa. Super. 100 - Commonwealth v. Logan · Commonwealth v. Pittman

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

  1. “Mandatory sentencing. — There shall be no authority in any court to impose on an offender to which this section is applicable a lesser sentence than provided for herein or to place the offender on probation, parole, work release or prerelease or to suspend sentence. Nothing in this section shall prevent the sentencing court from imposing a sentence greater than provided herein. Sentencing guidelines promulgated by the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing shall not supersede the mandatory sentences provided herein. Disposition under section 17 or 18 of The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act[, 35 P.S. §§ 780-117, 780-118] shall not be available to a defendant to which this section applies.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Although Pennsylvania courts have repeatedly interpreted the phrase “reasonable notice of the Commonwealth’s intention to proceed ...” as a legislative grant of discretion to the prosecutor to determine whether to invoke a mandatory sentence, this Court maintains that these interpretations are fundamentally flawed.”
    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.