440 Pa. Super. 263 - Commonwealth v. Walter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “I expressly consent to the search of my person, property and residence, without a warrant by agents of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole. Any items, in the possession of which constitutes a violation of parole/reparole shall be subject to seizure, and may be used as evidence in the parole revocation process.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 445 Pa. Super. 129 - Commonwealth v. Richardson · Scott v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole

2. “[T]o allow searches solely on the basis of the above clause effectively negates the underlying premise of Pickron , ... [which] clearly recognized that a parolee has Fourth Amendment rights, [and] such a right would be a sham if the above clause were used as justification for a search of a parolee’s person or residence.... :}í íjí ;|í ;|i The consent paragraph in question provides none of the systemic procedural safeguards mentioned in Pickron . It sets forth no criteria for when a search can be conducted and does not provide any form of “neutral” review of the request to search. In short, it completely takes away those rights Pickron recognized.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 445 Pa. Super. 129 - Commonwealth v. Richardson