Commonwealth v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
325 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 331 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably Commonwealth v. Riggins (1977), Commonwealth v. Devers (1988)
325 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 Williams v. People of State of New York · Commonwealth v. Bosurgi · United States v. Waters · Commonwealth v. Wrona · Commonwealth v. Green
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 331 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) 42 Pa.C.S. § 9721(a): “In determining the sentence to be imposed the court shall . . . consider and select one or more of the following alternatives . . . . ” (emphasis added) (1) an order of probation (2) a determination of guilt without further penalty (3) partial confinement (4) total confinement (5) a fine (2) 42 Pa.C.S. § 9721(b): The sentence must be imposed for the minimum amount of “confinement that is consistent with the protection of the public, the gravity of the offense . . . and the rehabilitative needs of the defendant . . . . ” (3) 42 Pa.C.S. § 9721(b): 4 “The court shall make as a part of the record, and disclose in open court at the time of sentencing, a statement of the reason or reasons for the sentence imposed.” (4) Pa.R.Cr.P. 1403(A)(2): “The sentencing judge shall place on the record his reasons for dispensing with the pre-sentence investigation report in any of the following instances: (a) where incarceration for one year or more is a possible disposition under the applicable statutes . . .. ””
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is true that the sentence imposed is normally left undisturbed on appeal because the trial court is in a far better position to weigh the factors involved in such a determination. However, we have held that the court’s discretion must be exercised within certain procedural limits, including the consideration of sufficient and accurate information.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In no case was a pre-sentence report ordered. No meaningful inquiry was made into the appellants’ backgrounds, individual characteristics, relative culpability or prospects for rehabilitation, despite clear evidence that the appellants’ offenses were committed in varying circumstances. In short, all appellants’ sentences were based on an abstract predetermination of the sentence to be imposed for the particular offense, without regard to the individual circumstances of particular cases.”
2 later decisions 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.