Commonwealth v. Murry’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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is well-settled that the grant of a mistrial must be manifestly necessary in order to avoid the bar of double jeopardy on retrial. Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497, 509-10 , 98 S.Ct. 824, 832 , 54 L.Ed.2d 717 (1978); Commonwealth v. Santiago, 492 Pa. 297, 301 , 424 A.2d 870, 872 (1981); Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 484 Pa. 130, 133 , 398 A.2d 978, 979 (1979); Commonwealth v. Bartolomucci, 468 Pa. 338, 345 , 362 A.2d 234, 238 (1976). Our eases leave no doubt however, that manifest necessity justifies discharge of a jury, when it appears that there is no reasonable probability of agreement on a verdict. Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 188 , 78 S.Ct. 221, 223 , 2 L.Ed.2d 199 (1957); Wade v. Hunter, 336 U.S. 684, 688 , 69 S.Ct. 834, 836 , 93 L.Ed. 974 (1949); Commonwealth v. White, 476 Pa. 350 , 382 A.2d 1205 (1978); Commonwealth v. Bolden, 472 Pa. 602 , 373 A.2d 90 (1977); Commonwealth v. Bartolomucci, 468 Pa. 338 , 362 A.2d 234 ; Commonwealth v. Brown, 451 Pa. 395 , 301 A.2d 876 (1973). See also, Commonwealth v. Santiago, 492 Pa. at 303 , 424 A.2d at 872 ; Commonwealth v. Monte, 459 Pa. 495 , 329 A.2d 836 (1974); Standard 15-5.-4(c) of the American Bar Association Standards Relating to the Administration of Criminal Justice, Trial by Jury (2d ed. Approved Draft 1978).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Commonwealth v. James