Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 811 A2D 104 - Commonwealth v. McJett

Commonwealth v. McJett’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Pennsylvania · Commonwealth v. Birdsong · 415 Pa. Super. 252 - Commonwealth v. Lopez · Commonwealth v. Luv · 225 Pa. Super. 381 - Commonwealth v. Ambers

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

  1. “(j) Owner’s burden of proof. — At the time of the hearing, if the Commonwealth produces evidence that the property in question was unlawfully used, possessed or otherwise subject to forfeiture under section 6801(a), the burden shall be upon the claimant to show: (1) That the claimant is the owner of the property or the holder of a chattel mortgage or contract of conditional sale thereon. (2) That the claimant lawfully acquired the property. (3) That it was not unlawfully used or possessed by him. In the event that it shall appear that the property was unlawfully used or possessed by a person other than the claimant, then the claimant shall show that the unlawful use or possession was without his knowledge or consent. Such absence of knowledge or consent must be reasonable under the circumstances presented.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “It is well settled that the Commonwealth may not permanently acquire derivative contraband which it has initially seized unconstitutionally. Because of the underlying penal purpose of the forfeiture proceedings, the United States Supreme Court had long ago determined that the remedy for violations of the Fourth Amendment, the exclusionary rule, extends to forfeiture proceedings.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “more likely than not standard.” ... Proof by a preponderance of the evidence is”
    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.