Commonwealth v. Vogel’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2016 · most notably Engle v. Isaac (1982), Commonwealth v. Rose (1974)
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 48 state decisions
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 Lynch v. Overholser · Commonwealth v. Bolish · Commonwealth v. Libonati · Commonwealth v. Novak · Commonwealth v. Woodhouse
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In my opinion, the term “second offense” means a subsequent murder which was committed after a conviction of a prior murder. Cf. Commonwealth ex rel. Swingle v. Ban- miller, 398 Pa. 43 , 156 A.2d 520 ; Commonwealth v. Swingle, 403 Pa. 293 , 169 A.2d 871 . Therefore, in order to increase the punishment for a second offense of murder (of the second degree), a prior conviction must precede the commission of the second murder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Whoever is convicted of the crime of murder of the second degree is guilty of a felony, and shall, for the first offense, be sentenced to undergo imprisonment by separate or solitary confinement not exceeding twenty (20) years, or fined not exceeding ten thousand dollars, or both, and for the second offense, shall undergo imprisonment for the period of his natural life.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We specifically decline to adopt the federal rule as to the burden of proving sanity or insanity. The burden remains on the defendant to prove his insanity by a fair preponderance of the 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.