Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 426 Pa. Super. 625 - Commonwealth v. Lopez

426 Pa. Super. 625 - Commonwealth v. Lopez’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

110199320002010decided

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. Tuladziecki · McKnight v. Commonwealth · In re the Primary Election of May 21, 1991 · 367 Pa. Super. 511 - Commonwealth v. Krum · Commonwealth v. Hornberger

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

  1. “[Although both crimes may involve a degree of recklessness, the reckless conduct involved in aggravated assault, unlike that included in the definition of involuntary manslaughter, is of such a degree that it gives rise to an inference of malice. As the element of malice is absent in involuntary manslaughter, aggravated assault under 18 Pa.C.S. § 2702(a)(1) cannot be a lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “wickedness of disposition, hardness of heart, wanton conduct, cruelty, recklessness of consequences and a mind regardless of, social duty.” Commonwealth v. Lopez, 426 Pa.Super. 625 , 627 A.2d 1229 , 1230 (Pa.Super.Ct.1993). Malice may also be found”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “explicitly states its intention to impose a standard sentence, then a sentence at the cusp of the standard and aggravated ranges is a standard [G]uideline sentence.”
    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.