Commonwealth v. Cameron’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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. “subsection 3 requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of (1) misconduct, (2) in the presence of the court, (3) committed with intent to obstruct the proceedings, which (4) obstructs the administration of justice. Commonwealth v. Owens, 496 Pa. 16 , 436 A.2d 129 (1981); Matter of Campolongo, 495 Pa. 627 , 435 A.2d 581 (1981); Commonwealth v. Reid, 494 Pa. 201 , 431 A.2d 218 (1981); Matter of Nugent, 494 Pa. 2 , 427 A.2d 1154 (1980); Commonwealth v. Rubright, 489 Pa. 356 , 414 A.2d 106 (1980) (plurality); In re Cogan, 485 Pa. 273 , 401 A.2d 1142 (1979); Commonwealth v. Garrison, 478 Pa. 356 , 386 A.2d 971 (1978) (plurality); In re Johnson, 467 Pa. 552 , 359 A.2d 739 (1976). Moreover, the Pennsylvania summary contempt statute has been interpreted to require that in order “[f]or conduct to constitute an obstruction of the administration of justice, it must significantly disrupt judicial proceedings.” Matter of Campolongo, supra 495 Pa. at 633 , 435 A.2d at 584 and cases cited therein.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 391 Pa. Super. 1 - MOFFATT BY MOFFATT v. Buano

2. ““The misbehavior of any person in the presence of the court, thereby obstructing the administration of justice.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 339 Pa. Super. 225 - Commonwealth v. Restifo