Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 479 Pa. 34 - Commonwealth v. Thomas

Commonwealth v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
September 2002
most recently cited

42 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently September 2002 · most notably Commonwealth v. Chmiel (1994), Commonwealth v. Spence (1993)

42 state decisions

1801978198019902000decided

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. Story · Commonwealth v. Kichline · Commonwealth v. Strantz · Commonwealth v. Tervalon · Commonwealth v. Sisak

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

  1. “(c) Accomplice defined. — A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if: (1) with the intent of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he: (i) solicits such other person to commit it; or (ii) aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing it; or (2) his conduct is expressly declared by law to establish his complicity.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[s]uch a witness, out of a reasonable expectation of leniency, has an interest in inculpating others.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “must have knowledge of, and participate in, the specific crime charged.”
    3 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.