Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 554 Pa. 569 - Commonwealth v. Myers

Commonwealth v. Myers’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

14 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3742

Relies on Com., Dept. of Transp. v. O'CONNELL · Commonwealth v. Farquharson · United States v. McDowell · United States v. Miele · Commonwealth v. Clark

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

  1. “§ 7508 Drug trafficking sentencing and penalties (a) General rule. — Notwithstanding any other provisions of this or any other act to the contrary, the following provisions shall apply: (7) A person who is convicted of violating section 13(a)(14), (30) or (37) of The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act where the controlled substance or a mixture containing it is heroin shall, upon conviction, be sentenced as set forth in this paragraph: (i) when the aggregate weight of the compound or mixture containing the heroin involved is at least 1.0 gram but less than 5.0 grams the sentence shall be a mandatory minimum term of two years in prison and a fíne of $5,000 or such larger amount as is sufficient to exhaust the assets utilized in and the proceeds from the illegal activity; however, if at the time of sentencing the defendant has been convicted of another drug trafficking offense: a mandatory minimum term of three years in prison and $10,000 or such larger amount as is sufficient to exhaust the assets utilized in and the proceeds from the illegal activity. 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 7508(a)(7)(i). Additionally: The initial determination of whether the Commonwealth proves that the mandatory minimum applies under Section 7508 is reserved by statute for the sentencing court. Thus, resolving whether the weight of the drug triggers application of the mandatory minimum requires the judge to sit as a fact-finder, necessitating credibility determinations. If the court then finds the ”
    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.