454 Pa. Super. 428 - Commonwealth v. Yager’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably Commonwealth v. Allen (1999), 2000 Pa. Super. 396 - Commonwealth v. Lambert (2000)
89 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 Cogdell v. United States · Krupinski v. Vocational Technical School Eastern Northampton County · Kemmerer v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing · Commonwealth v. Shaffer · Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Frankel
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[CJlaims of counsel’s ineffectiveness in connection with a guilty plea will provide a basis for relief only if the ineffectiveness caused an involuntary or unknowing plea. This is similar to the “manifest injustice” standard applicable to all post-sentence attempts to withdraw a guilty plea. The law does not require that appellant be pleased with the outcome of his decision to enter a plea of guilty: “All that is required is that [appellant’s] decision to plead guilty be knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made.””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) That the petitioner has been convicted of a crime under the laws of this Commonwealth and is at the time relief is granted: (i) currently serving a sentence of imprisonment[.] (2) That the conviction or sentence resulted from one or more of the following: (ii) Ineffective assistance of counsel, which in the circumstances of the particular case, so undermined the truth-determining process that no reliable adjudication of guilt or innocence could have taken place.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[I]n order to determine the voluntariness of the plea and whether the defendant acted knowingly and intelligently, the trial court must, at a minimum, inquire into the following six areas: (1) Does the defendant understand the nature of the charges to which he is pleading guilty? (2) Is there a factual basis for the plea? (3) Does the defendant understand that he has a right to trial by jury? (4) Does the defendant understand that he is presumed innocent until he is found guilty? (5) Is the defendant aware of the permissible ranges of sentences and/or fines for the offenses charged? (6) Is the defendant aware that the judge is not bound by the terms of any plea agreement tendered unless the judge accepts such agreement?”
3 later decisions 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.