In re Turner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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

1. “‘Crime’ means an act committed in Pennsylvania which, if committed by a mentally competent, criminally responsible adult, who had no legal exemption or defense, would constitute a crime as defined in and proscribed by Title 18 of the ‘Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes,’ (relating to crimes and offenses) . . . Provided, however, That no act involving the operation of a motor vehicle which results in injury shall constitute a crime for the purpose of this act unless such in jury was intentionally inflicted through the use of a motor vehicle.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Price v. Commonwealth · Petition of Oakgrove on Behalf of Oakgrove

2. “Under Section [2], therefore, a motor-vehicle injury could be "intentionally inflicted’ only if the act resulting in injury was committed (1) with the purpose of causing the injury or death of another or (2) with knowledge that the injury or death of another would be an inevitable consequence. The first situation might be illustrated if a person uses a car as a weapon with the design of killing or injuring another, such as by running down a rival or an enemy. The second situation might be illustrated if a person uses a car in a manner which he or she knows will inevitably result in death or injury to another (even though no particular harm is desired), such as driving purposefully into a crowd of people who are blocking his or her passage.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Price v. Commonwealth

3. ““The actor desired to cause the consequences of his act, or that he believes that the consequences are substantially certain to result from it... If the actor knows that the consequences are certain, or substantially certain, to result from his act and still goes ahead, he is treated by the law as if he had in fact desired to produce the result... And if you find that the defendant, Mr. Hassinger, did have the intent to harm or kill any individual — not necessarily Mr. Harvey — then that is sufficient to find that that was his intention and that he did act intentionally.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 325 Pa. Super. 484 - Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Hassinger