Commonwealth v. O'Bryant’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
68 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Commonwealth v. Byrd (1980), Commonwealth v. Cruz (1980)
68 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 · Johnson v. Zerbst · Lego v. Twomey · Culombe v. Connecticut · United States v. District Court
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]his Court must consider only the evidence presented by the Commonwealth and so much of the evidence for the defense as fairly read in the context of the record as a whole, remains uncontradicted____ Where the suppression court’s findings have ample support in the record, they may not be disturbed on appeal.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he totality of the circumstances surrounding the statement must be examined, including: duration and methods of interrogation; the conditions of confinement; the manifest attitudes of the police toward the defendant; defendant's physical and psychological condition; and any other condition which may drain the defendant's power of resistance to suggestion or to undermine his ability to exercise free will. See Culombe v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961); Commonwealth v. Kichline, 468 Pa. 265 , 361 A.2d 282 (1976).”
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.