Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 471 Pa. 271 - Commonwealth v. Hart

Commonwealth v. Hart’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
March 2005
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently March 2005 · most notably 265 Pa. Super. 159 - Commonwealth v. Rose (1979), Commonwealth v. Bridges (1977)

25 state decisions

2201977198019902000decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · Commonwealth v. Daniels · Commonwealth v. Bayard · Commonwealth v. Saunders · Commonwealth v. Cummings

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

  1. ““In Commonwealth v. Hart, 471 Pa. 271 , 370 A.2d 298 (1977), this court, in citing Commonwealth v. Cummings, 466 Pa. 332 , 353 A.2d 381 (1976), stated: “ ‘ “ . . . This court has consistently held that when a defendant takes the stand and reiterates the factual narrative contained in a confession claimed to be invalid — whether for constitutional infirmities or because of violation of Rule 130, Pa.R.Crim.P., 19 P.S. (1975 Pamphlet — the admission into evidence of the alleged illegal formal confession, if error at all, is harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt. See Commonwealth v. Saunders, 459 Pa. 677 , 331 A.2d 193 (1975); Commonwealth v. Brittain, 455 Pa. 562 , 317 A.2d 219 (1974).”’ 2”
    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.