Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 459 Pa. 12 - Commonwealth v. Walker

Commonwealth v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
December 1991
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently December 1991

18 state decisions

120197419801990decided

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. Roscioli · Commonwealth v. Cannon · Commonwealth v. Goins · Commonwealth v. Raymond

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

  1. “The challenged statement was merely an attempt to narrow the issues for the jury’s consideration. In view of the length of time that appellant was alleged to have been in the bar and subject to observation by Mr. Jones, who by virtue of their prior relationship would have no difficulty in recognizing the appellant, the question of mistaken identity was clearly not in the case. As the trial judge properly pointed out, the case essentially turned upon the credibility of irreconcilably conflicting testimony. In such a situation, it was clearly proper for the trial judge to exercise his right to clarify the issues for jury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(emphasis added by Supreme Court) and held that this statement simply indicated what the Commonwealth's evidence if believed tended to establish. We find the present case to be more in line with Walker and Woodward . The court succinctly stated the issue before the jury and then made a passing comment as to its opinion, immediately followed by a statement that it was for the jury to determine. The court continually, throughout its charge noted that the jury was the sole factfinder. Accordingly, we find no reversible error; even if the comment:”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “now if you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant shot and killed the victim under the circumstances as the Commonwealth has proved to you.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.