Commonwealth v. Hicks’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Commonwealth v. Whitney (1986), Commonwealth v. Chacko (1983)
1 federal appellate · 42 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Commonwealth v. Robson · Commonwealth v. Cheeks · Commonwealth v. Stafford · 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An accused may not escape criminal liability on the ground that, prior to the criminal act, his victim was not in perfect health, or the blow he inflicted was not mortal, or the immediate cause of death. If his blow started the chain of causation which led to the death, he is guilty of homicide. Commonwealth v. Hicks, 466 Pa. 499, 505 , 353 A.2d 803, 805 (1976).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“This Court has consistently refused to adhere to a per se rule of incapacity to waive constitutional rights based on mental or physical deficiencies. Commonwealth v. Scoggins, 451 Pa. 472, 476 , 304 A.2d 102 (1973); Commonwealth v. Daniels, 451 Pa. 163, 168 , 301 A.2d 841, 844 (1973). Rather, we look at all the circumstances to determine if a knowing and intelligent waiver was effected. There is no question that a person of below average mental ability can effectively waive his constitutional rights. Commonwealth v. Abrams, 443 Pa. 295 , 278 A.2d 902 (1971).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The Commonwealth must prove that appellant’s blows were the legal cause of death beyond a reasonable doubt. . However, causation is an issue of fact for the jury to decide. . . . The jury was free to accept the medical opinion of the Commonwealth’s pathologist and reject the opinions of the defense expert witness. . It is clear that accepting as true all the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom, in a light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the jury had sufficient basis to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the blows delivered by the banister rung and appellant’s fists were the legal cause of Turner’s demise.” (Citations omitted.)”
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.