Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 73 PACOMMW 483 - Ruza v. Commonwealth

Ruza v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
March 1989
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth ex rel. Rambeau v. Rundle · State v. Mower · Passaro v. Commonwealth · Brown v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “We conclude that the board complied with the regulation [ 37 Pa. Code §71.4 ] by affording the first hearing opportunity sixty-two days after the date of conviction. As we noted in Passaro [v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 56 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 32 , 424 A.2d 561 (1981)], the responsibility to provide counsel devolves upon the county of incarceration. We cannot nullify the board’s proceedings for untimeliness where the delay resulted from a matter outside the board’s responsibility. Having satisfied its obligation with respect to the scheduling of a hearing, the board was obliged not to proceed until counsel had been provided. ...”
    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.