Commonwealth v. Farley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

58 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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “.An arrest may be accomplished by ‘any act that indicates an intention to take [a person] into custody and subjects him to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest’ (Quoting from 2 Am.Jur.2d Arrest, § 1 at 695).””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Silo · Commonwealth v. Morton

2. ““Evidence obtained following an illegal arrest must be suppressed unless the Commonwealth can establish that the evidence is sufficiently purged of any taint from the illegal arrest.” Commonwealth v. Farley, 468 Pa. 487 , 364 A.2d 299 (1976); Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 , 95 S.Ct. 2254 , 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Harris · Commonwealth v. Green

3. “[t]he relevant test for determining whether a confession following an illegal arrest must be suppressed is: “... ‘whether, granting establishment of the primary illegality, the evidence to which instant objection is made has been come at by exploitation of that illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary taint.’ ” (Citations omitted.) Wong Sun v. United States, supra, 371 U.S. [471] at 488, 83 S.Ct. [407] at 417 [ 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963)]; accord, Brown v. Illinois, supra, 422 U.S. [590] at 597, 95 S.Ct. [2254] at 2259 [ 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975)]; Commonwealth v. Bruno, 466 Pa. 245, 255 , 352 A.2d 40, 45 (1976); Commonwealth v. Whitaker, 461 Pa. 407, 412 , 336 A.2d 603, 606 (1975); Betrand Appeal, supra, 451 Pa. [381] at 381, 303 A.2d [486] at 490 [(1973)]. The challenged confession may be purged of the primary taint only if (1) it results from an intervening act of free will which is free of any element of coerciveness due to the unlawful arrest, or (2) the connection between the arrest and the confession has become so attenuated as to dissipate the taint. Commonwealth v. Whitaker, supra, 461 Pa. at 414-17 , 336 A.2d at 607-08 ; Betrand Appeal, supra, 451 Pa. at 388-89, 303 A.2d at 490; Commonwealth v. Bishop, 425 Pa. 175, 183 , 228 A.2d 661, 666 , cert. denied, 389 U.S. 875 , 88 S.Ct. 168 , 19 L.Ed.2d 159 (1967); see Wong Sun v. United States, supra, 371 U.S. at 486, 491 , 83 S.Ct. at 416, 419 . Moreover, once the illegal arrest has bee”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 340 Pa. Super. 592 - Commonwealth v. Mancini