Commonwealth v. Bethea’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 92 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 108 later decisions — most recently August 2025 · most notably Commonwealth v. Jones (2007), Commonwealth v. Spotz (2005)
5 federal appellate · 92 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. Grant · Phillips v. A-Best Products Co. · Mills v. United States · Buffalo Township v. Jones · Commonwealth v. Bridges
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 108 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Subject matter jurisdiction and venue are distinct. However, since jurisdiction references the power of a court to entertain and adjudicate a matter while venue pertains to the locality most convenient to the proper disposition of a matter, venue can only be proper where jurisdiction already exists.... The terms are often used interchangeably because they must exist simultaneously in order for a court to properly exercise its power to resolve a particular controversy.” Id. at 113-14, 828 A.2d at 1074-75 .”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[s]ubject matter jurisdiction relates to the competency of a court to hear and decide the type of controversy presented.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]ll courts of common pleas have statewide subject matter jurisdiction in cases arising under the Crimes Code.”
3 later decisions 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.