Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 canonical passages across 8 cases, quoted by 271 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 Com. v. Hopkins, G..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Com. v. Hopkins, G. Anchor | green | “counsel is presumed to have rendered effective assistance.” | 69 |
| 2 | Commonwealth v. Beatty | green | “our standard of review of the denial of a pcra petition is limited to examining whether the evidence of record supports the court's determination and whether its decision is free of legal error.” | 54 |
| 3 | Commonwealth v. Kelley | green | “once this threshold is met we apply the 'reasonable basis' test to determine whether counsel's chosen course was designed to effectuate his client's interests.” | 39 |
| 4 | Commonwealth v. Smith | green | “the threshold inquiry in ineffectiveness claims is whether the issue/argument/tactic which counsel has foregone and which forms the basis for the assertion of ineffectiveness is of arguable merit.” | 29 |
| 5 | Commonwealth v. Spotz | green | “to demonstrate prejudice, the petitioner must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceedings would have been different. a reasonable probability is a probability that is sufficient to undermine confidence …” | 26 |
| 6 | Commonwealth v. Steele | green | “where it is clear that a petitioner has failed to meet any of the three, distinct prongs of the...test, the claim may be disposed of on that basis alone, without a determination of whether the other two prongs have been met.” | 23 |
| 7 | Commonwealth v. Spotz | green | “a reasonable probability is a probability that is sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome of the proceeding.” | 14 |
| 8 | Com. v. Howard, M. | green | “we review the court's legal conclusions de novo.” | 10 |
| 9 | Com. v. Turetsky | green | “the petitioner bears the burden of proving all three prongs of the test.” | 7 |
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.