3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 11 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Commonwealth v. Orie.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Commonwealth v. Orie Anchor | green | “because the particularity requirement in article i, section 8 is more stringent than in the fourth amendment, if the warrant is satisfactory under the pennsylvania constitution it will also be satisfactory under the federal constitution.” | 5 |
| 2 | Commonwealth v. Dougalewicz | green | “authorizes a search in terms so ambiguous as to allow the executing officers to pick and choose among an individual's possessions to find which items to seize,” | 3 |
| 3 | Commonwealth v. Dougalewicz | green | “it is a fundamental rule of law that a warrant must name or describe with particularity the property to be seized and the person or place to be searched;” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.