Commonwealth v. Sorrell’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 79 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently November 2015 · most notably Commonwealth v. Miller (1995), Commonwealth v. Morales (1985)
2 federal appellate · 79 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 Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann · McKeiver v. Pennsylvania · Bloom v. Illinois · Williams v. Florida
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he decision whether to grant a defense request for a non-jury trial must be made solely by the trial court, which is charged with the constitutional responsibility of assuring the fair and orderly administration of justice. * * * * * * While the prosecutor’s concurrence in or opposition to a defense request for a non-jury trial is a relevant consideration in determining the mode of trial, amended Rule 1101 does not deem any one fact or circumstance controlling. Rather, the decision whether to permit a non-jury trial is to be made by the court, taking into account all relevant considerations. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Pettiford, 265 Pa.Super. 466 , 402 A.2d 532 (1979), Commonwealth v. Lee, 262 Pa.Super. 280 , 396 A.2d 755 (1978), and Commonwealth v. Garrison, 242 Pa.Super. 509 , 364 A.2d 388 (1976) (jury trial waivers properly denied where records indicated “judge shopping”).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“exercising the discretion conferred by [Pa.Crim.P.] Rule 1101 in assessing whether a non-jury trial should be permitted.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he right to trial by jury is not a `substantive right,' but a right of procedure through which rights conferred by substantive law are enforced.”
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.