Commonwealth v. Gambal’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably 386 Pa. Super. 322 - Commonwealth v. Williams (1989), Commonwealth v. Saranchak (1996)
42 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 v. Tuladziecki · 367 Pa. Super. 511 - Commonwealth v. Krum · 373 Pa. Super. 618 - Commonwealth v. Monroe
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]n appellant who challenges the discretionary aspects of a sentence in a criminal matter shall set forth in his brief a concise statement of the reasons relied upon for allowance of appeal with respect to the discretionary aspects of a sentence. The statement shall immediately precede the argument on the merits with respect to the discretionary aspects of sentence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is contemplated by [42 Pa.C.S. § 9781(b) ] that a determination of whether a substantial question exists will be made prior to a full examination of the merits of the issue of the appropriateness of thé sentence. Where a concise statement of the reasons relied upon for appeal is provided, the court’s need to delve into the detailed arguments provided in the appellant’s brief is minimized, and, thus, the inquiry into whether there is a substantial question is more clearly separated from a full consideration of the merits of the appeal.”
1 later decision 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.