Krantz v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Rivenbark v. Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole (1985), Weaver v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole (1997)
53 state decisions
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 Morrissey v. Brewer · Gaito v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole · Corley v. Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole · Gundy v. Commonwealth · Zazo 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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[U]nder Pennsylvania law, the sentence imposed for a criminal offense is the maximum term. The minimum term merely sets the date prior to which a prisoner may not be pa-roled_ The significance of a parolee's minimum term is that it establishes a parole eligibility date.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“We duly note that due process does not require that a criminal defendant receive credit on a subsequent unrelated sentence for time served on a prior invalid sentence. See United States ex rel. Smith v. Rundle, 285 F. Supp. 965 (E.D. Pa. 1966). There is no constitutional requirement that the time a defendant served on a prior invalid sentence must be credited against a subsequent valid sentence arising from unrelated offenses as the Constitution does not authorize penal checking accounts.”
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.