Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 420 Pa. Super. 606 - Commonwealth v. Shoop

420 Pa. Super. 606 - Commonwealth v. Shoop’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
April 2011
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 2011

12 state decisions

100199220002010decided

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 Liciaga v. Court of Common Pleas · Riggins Case · Commonwealth Ex Rel. Fitzpatrick v. Mirarchi · Commonwealth v. Kline · 320 Pa. Super. 56 - Commonwealth v. Sufrich

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

  1. “It is clear that determinations of district justices at preliminary hearings are interlocutory and non-appealable. See Liciaga v. Court of Common Pleas, 523 Pa. 258 , 566 A.2d 246 (1989); In re Riggins, 435 Pa. 321 , 254 A.2d 616 (1969). In Liciaga , the Supreme Court explained that “[s]ince our law does not provide an additional avenue to explore the challenge of an alleged improper dismissal of a defendant at the preliminary hearing stage, if the Commonwealth seeks to reinstitute charges, it must refile the same charges before a different magistrate.” Liciaga, 523 Pa. at 267 , 566 A.2d at 250 ; see also Riggins, 435 Pa. at 321 , 254 A.2d at 617 (“[W]hen the Commonwealth believes that a defendant has been improperly discharged by a committing magistrate its remedy is to have the defendant re-arrested and taken before another magistrate.”).”
    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.