Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 419 PASUPER 538 - Commonwealth v. Collington

Commonwealth v. Collington’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth v. Heidnik

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

  1. “[A]ctual intimidation of a witness is not an essential element of the crime. The crime is committed if one, with the necessary mens rea, " attempts " to intimidate a witness or victim....The trier of the facts, therefore, could find that appellant attempted to intimidate his accuser and that he did so intending or, at least, having knowledge that his conduct was likely to, impede, impair or interfere with the administration of criminal justice.... The Commonwealth is not required to prove mens rea by direct evidence. Frequently such evidence is not available. In such cases, the Commonwealth may rely on circumstantial evidence.”
    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.