Commonwealth v. Small’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 50 state decisions

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

1. “[A]n issue has been previously litigated if ... the highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a matter of right has ruled on the merits of the issue.” Id. § 9544(a)(2).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Greene v. Palakovich · Com. of Pa. v. Jordan

2. “Prosecutor: The second aggravating circumstance, ladies and gentlemen, is that [Appellant] has a significant history of felony convictions involving violence or the threat of violence to the person.... The record reflected during the course of the testimony that [Appellant] was convicted of robbery in Cumberland County, conspiracy to commit robbery in Cumberland County, robbery in Cumberland County, three counts of burglary in Cumberland County. Burglary.... Burglary is a crime of violence. Perhaps the most frightening thing that can happen ... one of the most frightening things that can happen is a man intruding or a woman intruding into your house. Defense Counsel: Your Honor, I’m going to object at this point. There was no testimony about the nature of the burglaries at all. Prosecutor: Burglary is a burglary. Defense Counsel: Was it a home? Was it a building? Prosecutor: It was a home. It was a building. Defense Counsel: It was never testified there was anyone’s home [sic]— Court: That’s true. Burglary is, as you know, under the law[,] entering a building without lawful right or being invited to commit a crime in the building, but no one needs to be there for burglary. Just so the jury understands that. As far as commenting as to the evidence or the factual circumstances surrounding the offenses, I would suggest counsel not refer to those since that wasn’t given to the jury nor will it be given. Prosecutor: Your Honor, may I say that the burglary is considered a crime of ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Spotz

3. “Tucker's credibility was already assaulted to the nth degree - he was depicted as a crook, a recidivist, a drug abuser, a drunkard, and an admitted liar.... Consequently, we agree with the PCRA court that '[c]rimen falsi impeachment would have been merely cumulative and was unnecessary.' Essentially, Small was not prejudiced by counsel not cross-examining Tucker about crimen falsi as that information would have just reiterated a significant credibility attack that already occurred.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Brown