Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 552 Pa. 44 - Commonwealth v. Snyder

Commonwealth v. Snyder’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
September 2023
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably Commonwealth v. Haag (2002), Com., Dept. of Transp. v. Taylor (2004)

36 state decisions

3001998200020102020decided

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 Barker v. Wingo · United States v. Marion · Hoffa v. United States · United States v. Lovasco · Paulussen v. Herion

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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[I]n Sneed , the police did not gather sufficient evidence to arrest the defendant, nor did they know where he was, because the defendant fled to Georgia, where he was arrested on unrelated charges. His cellmates in Georgia then provided information to prison authorities about the defendant’s involvement in the Pennsylvania murder, and when the Georgia Police contacted the Philadelphia police, they reactivated their investigation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “statutes of limitation do not define the full extent of the rights of the accused concerning the time in which charges can be filed. The constitutional right to due process also protects defendants from having to defend stale charges, and criminal charges should be dismissed if improper pre-arrest delay causes prejudice to the defendant’s right to a fair trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment would require dismissal of the indictment if it were shown at trial that the pre-indictment delay in this case caused substantial prejudice to ap-pellees’ rights to a fair trial and that the delay was an intentional device to gain a tactical advantage over the accused.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.