Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 718 A2D 804 - Commonwealth v. Glass

Commonwealth v. Glass’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
3
states following
November 2007
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Olmstead v. United States · Eisenstadt v. Baker · Fertel-Rust v. Dane County Social Services · Pennsylvania v. Labron · DiCarlantonio v. United States

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

  1. “to protect citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures”); id. at 19 (citing 34 Pa.C.S. § 3502). . Enforcement, it is worth noting, is a monumental ta'sk. For every three hundred fifty square miles of land in Pennsylvania, only one full-time WCO is assigned to conduct wildlife protection. A WCO’s duties include not just enforcing hunting and trapping laws but also investigating hunting accidents, conducting wildlife surveys, assisting in wildlife research projects, and providing educational programs. Pa. Game Commit,”
    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.