Commonwealth v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We leave it to the Commonwealth to decide whether it will present evidence at re-sentencing that the drug buy occurred within a school zone, thereby allowing the sentencing court to conclude that the Commonwealth has met its burden.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 2004 Pa. Super. 488 - Commonwealth v. Wilson · Commonwealth v. Wilson

2. “On March 22, 2001, [Ajppellant sold .47 of a gram of cocaine to a confidential informant and an undercover police officer. Following his arrest on April 22, 2001, the court appointed Diane Morgan, Esq., of the Dauphin County Public Defender’s Office to represent [Ajppellant. Attorney Morgan received a Sentencing Guideline Form, dated August 14, 2001, indicating a standard sentence range of 21 to 27 months. Subsequently, newly appointed counsel, Justin J. McShane, Esq., also of the Dauphin County Public Defender’s Office, received a revised Sentencing Guideline Form, dated February 12, 2002, indicating a standard range of 33 to 63 months, reflecting the addition of the sentencing enhancement required by 204 Pa.Code § 303.9(c) for delivery of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school. On February 13, 2002, following a guilty plea colloquy during which the court informed [Ajppellant that he could receive a maximum sentence of 20 years’ incarceration, [Ajppellant entered an open plea of guilty to one count of delivery of a controlled substance. (Guilty plea transcript, 2/13/02 at 3, 5.) On March 28, 2002, the court sentenced [Ajppellant to four to ten years’ incarceration. (Sentencing . transcript, 3/28/02, at 7.) At sentencing, [Ajppellant questioned the length of the sentence, claiming he had been told his sentence would range between 21 and 27 months. (Id. at 8.) The court then asked counsel for clarification, and Attorney McShane explained that he had reviewed the ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2004 Pa. Super. 488 - Commonwealth v. Wilson

3. “(c) Youth/School Enhancement sentence recommendations. If the court determines that an offender violated the drug act pursuant to § 303.10(b), 12 months shall be added to the lower limit of the standard range of the applicable sentencing matrix and 36 months shall be added to the upper limit of the standard range of the applicable sentencing matrix. The range of sentences (i.e. — standard range) shall be considered by the court for each combination of Offense Gravity Score [OGS] and Prior Record Score [PRS].”

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