Commonwealth v. Warin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A majority of this Court has yet to agree upon the appropriate rationale underlying the right to such an instruction. See [(Commonwealth v. Polimeni) 474 Pa. 430, 442 , 378 A.2d 1189, 1195 ]. (Opinion of Pomeroy, J., finding such a right when the evidence provides a rational basis for a verdict of involuntary manslaughter); Commonwealth v. Garcia, supra, 474 Pa. at 465 , 378 A.2d at 1207 (Opinion of Roberts, J., basing this right upon the theory that involuntary manslaughter is a lesser included offense of murder); Commonwealth v. Polimeni, supra, 474 Pa. at 447-48 , 378 A.2d at 1198 (Concurring opinion of Manderino, J., suggesting that such an instruction proper ly allows the jury to exercise compassion and return a verdict of involuntary manslaughter); Commonwealth v. Dussinger, supra, 478 Pa. at 197-98 , 386 A.2d 507 -508 (Concurring opinion of Nix, J., finding such a right only where the factual dispute centers upon an element which distinguishes murder from involuntary manslaughter).” 484 Pa. at 558 , 400 A.2d at 589 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 270 Pa. Super. 471 - Commonwealth v. DiVentura · Commonwealth v. Holmes

2. ““Appellee argues that the rule announced in the Polimeni-Garcia-Ford trilogy should be applied only to cases in which trial commenced after October 7, 1977, the date upon which the Polimeni, Garcia, and Ford decisions were announced. Appellee’s argument is premised upon the assumption that the Polimeni-Garcia-Ford trilogy changed prior law. This, we believe, is a false premise. These cases merely interpreted the 1972 Crimes Code, 18 Pa.C. S.A. § 101 et seq. (1973 & Supp. 1978-79) which changed the prior practice. Therefore, since the criminal act in the instant case was controlled by the 1972 Code, there is no question presented as to retroactivity. See Commonwealth v. Dussinger, 478 Pa. 182, 195 , 386 A.2d 500, 506 (1978.)””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 273 Pa. Super. 344 - Commonwealth v. Marshall · 270 Pa. Super. 471 - Commonwealth v. DiVentura

3. “[A] jury instruction on involuntary manslaughter is required only when the trial evidence provides a rational basis for such a verdict. Clearly there is no such rational basis here. According to the appellant’s own trial testimony, he intentionally struck the blow which caused the victim’s death. The fact that appellant may have acted under heat of passion does not make the crime involuntary manslaughter.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Bishop v. Mazurkiewicz