Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 7/24/2008
Commonwealth v. Greer
Citations
- 951 A.2d 346
- 597 Pa. 373
- 2008 Pa. LEXIS 1179
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- declining to adopt per se rule governing situation when trial court learns numerical division of deliberating jury
- declining to adopt per se rule governing situation when trial court learns numerical division of deliberating jury
- noting trial court’s decision to direct jury to deliberate further will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is a showing that the court abused its discretion or that the jury’s verdict was the product of coercion or fatigue
- A Spencer charge is a non-coercive charge instructing the jurors to be true to their convictions but to reconsider their original views
- unpersuaded by the argument that the fact the court knew the jury’s numerical division, as well as the identities of the holdouts as volunteered by the jury forewoman, makes an otherwise non- coercive instruction coercive
- “These sorts of ephemeral psychological pressures are both inherent in the jury function and difficult to measure. . . . [W]e should tread carefully before allowing speculation about such effects to control the relevant jurisprudence.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Castille, Former, Cappy, Baldwin, Fitzgerald, Eakin, Baer, Saylor
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Commonwealth v. MarionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-09-02· cited 39×
- Commonwealth v. PattonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-12-30· cited 26×
- State v. KnightNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2023-07-19· cited 5×
- Com. v. Reyes, T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2025-12-22· cited 1×
- Com. v. Evans, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2026-05-12· cited 1×
- Com. v. Miller, H.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2018-06-11
- Commonwealth v. Knight, M., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2020-11-18
- State of Iowa v. Johnny Blahnik Church a/k/a Drew Alan BlahnikSupreme Court of Iowa· 2023-10-27
Cites
30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Lowenfield v. PhelpsSupreme Court· 1988-03-07· cited 1,385×
- Brasfield v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1926-11-22· cited 490×
- Grady v. Frito-Lay, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-12-31· cited 277×
- United States v. Cecil RobinsonSecond Circuit· 1977-07-28· cited 257×
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1963-10-14· cited 250×
- United States v. Elliott Kahaner, Antonio Corallo and James Vincent KeoghSecond Circuit· 1963-05-27· cited 245×
- United States v. FrostSixth Circuit· 1997-09-12· cited 200×
- United States v. James Norton, United States of America v. Paul Fosco, James Pinckard, Paul A. Di Franco, James Norton, DefendantsEleventh Circuit· 1989-03-16· cited 153×
- Irven Green and Robert Benjamin Smith v. United States of America, Arnold Jack Johnson v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1962-11-02· cited 146×
- Desmond v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware· 1994-11-14· cited 144×
- Geisinger v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court· 1978-02-27· cited 137×
- Commonwealth v. SpencerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1971-03-25· cited 134×
- Commonwealth v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-12-28· cited 131×
- United States v. Paul Lash (90-1449), Richard Tommasi (90-1450), Lawrence Dresner (90-1451), and Carol Ross (90-1500)Sixth Circuit· 1991-09-03· cited 99×
- Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. DenglerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2005-12-30· cited 96×
- United States v. Michael A. AjiboyeNinth Circuit· 1992-04-14· cited 82×
- John B. Sanders, Jr. v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1969-10-28· cited 81×
- United States v. Atthapol Sae-ChuaNinth Circuit· 1984-02-09· cited 61×
- Bowen v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1946-02-21· cited 54×
- Ronald Williams v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1964-06-25· cited 41×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.