Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 565 Pa. 348 - Commonwealth v. Natividad

Commonwealth v. Natividad’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
October 2023
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2023 · most notably Commonwealth v. Freeman (2003), Commonwealth v. Robinson (2004)

26 state decisions

180200120102020decided

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 Francis v. Swisher · Commonwealth v. Means

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

  1. “Adequate notice is one of the essential elements of procedural due process. We agree that the better practice is to require notice of the intent to introduce victim impact testimony prior to trial. A requirement of notice prior to trial enables the defendant to investigate the background of the decedent, and prepare for potential victim impact testimony prior to jury selection. Nor is it a burden for the Commonwealth to provide pretrial notice limited to a list of potential witnesses and a brief outline of their proffered testimony.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.