Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 721 A2D 363 - Commonwealth v. Allburn

Commonwealth v. Allburn’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2025

19 state decisions

901998200020102020decided

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. Dugger · Commonwealth v. Durst · Commonwealth v. Stair · 337 Pa. Super. 548 - Commonwealth v. Black · Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. DeMesquita

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

  1. “(d) Commonwealth Appeals in Criminal Cases. In a criminal case, under the circumstances provided by law, the Commonwealth may take an appeal as of right from an order that does not end the entire case where the Commonwealth certifies in the notice of appeal that the order will terminate or substantially handicap the prosecution. Under this section, the Commonwealth may appeal if it certifies the interlocutory order will terminate or substantially handicap the prosecution ... ‘Such certification is required as a means of preventing frivolous appeals and appeals intended solely for delay.’ Commonwealth v. Dugger, 506 Pa. 537, 547 , 486 A.2d 382, 386 (1985). Failure to include the certification renders the questioned order unap-pealable. Commonwealth v. Malinowski, 543 Pa. 350, 358 , 671 A.2d 674, 678 (1996).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “§ 3104. Evidence of victim’s sexual conduct (a) General rule. — Evidence of specific instances of the alleged victim’s past sexual conduct, opinion evidence of the alleged victim’s past sexual conduct, and reputation evidence of the alleged victim’s past sexual conduct shall not be admissible in prosecutions under this chapter except evidence of the alleged victim’s past sexual conduct with the defendant where consent of the alleged victim is at issue and such evidence is otherwise admissible pursuant to the rules of evidence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “A trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence of the sexual history of a sexual abuse complainant will be reversed only where there has been a clear abuse of discretion. ‘An abuse of discretion is not merely an error of judgment, but if in reaching a conclusion the law is overridden or misapplied or the judgment exercised is manifestly unreasonable, or the result of partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill will, as shown by the evidence or the record, discretion is abused.’”
    3 later decisions 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.