Commonwealth v. McNeil’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 161 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 163 later decisions — most recently September 2019 · most notably Commonwealth v. Durst (1989), Commonwealth v. Brown (1994)
2 federal appellate · 161 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 Commonwealth Ex Rel. Washington v. Maroney · Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Weintraub · Commonwealth v. Hubbard · Commonwealth v. Pettus · Commonwealth v. Miller
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 163 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our task ... encompasses both an independent review of the record,____and an examination of counsel’s stewardship of the now challenged proceedings in light of the available alternatives____ We cannot emphasize strongly enough, however, that our inquiry ceases and counsel’s assistance is deemed constitutionally effective once we are able to conclude that the particular course chosen by counsel had some reasonable basis designed to effectuate his client’s interests. The test is not whether other alternatives were more reasonable, employing a hindsight evaluation of the record. Although weigh the alternatives we must, the balance tips in favor of a finding of effective assistance as soon as it is determined that trial counsel’s decisions had any reasonable basis.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Having freely and deliberately chosen to offer testimony which he now asserts was false, appellee stands before this Court and attempts to reap a windfall new trial on account of his own perjury. The criminal justice system cannot and will not tolerate such an obvious and flagrant affront to the integrity of the truth determining process thinly disguised under the rubric of `ineffective assistance.' As we stated in Commonwealth v. Szuchon, [506] Pa. [228], 484 A.2d 1365 (1984), to `hold otherwise would create a situation wherein a defendant, by design, could build into his case ineffective assistance of counsel claims, thus guaranteeing himself a basis for a new trial if the verdict were adverse to him.' 484 A.2d at 1377 ." Commonwealth v. McNeil, supra, 487 A.2d at 807-808 (footnote omitted).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"It is undoubtedly true that a defense attorney's failure to investigate potentially meritorious defenses or failure to interview witnesses whose testimony could prove beneficial and exculpatory can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel if no reasonable basis exists for counsel's failure.... However, the value of a particular defense or witness' testimony is not judged abstractly in the vacuum of what might have been but in the reality of what is; accordingly, the defendant must sustain his burden of proving how the `road not taken' or the testimony of the uninterviewed witness would have been beneficial under the facts and circumstances of his case.... "Exposed to the light of reality, appellee's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel evaporates. The critical factor is that the newfound `victims' conspiracy/consent' defense, and Mr. Gore's testimony to support that defense, would not have been beneficial because it would have utterly and disastrously contradicted appellee's trial testimony that he did not know the victim." Commonwealth v. McNeil, supra, 487 A.2d at 806 (emphasis in original).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Skjonsby
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.