Commonwealth v. Kelly

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• permitting court to “define and frame for the jury those factual issues which are contested”
• necessary mens rea for receiving stolen property may arise following actual receipt of property; statute, by express terms, makes it criminal to “retain” stolen property

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. Baird
  First Circuit· 2013-04-05· cited 36×
• Commonwealth v. Stewart
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-02-24· cited 18×
• Sebek v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1998-07-10· cited 3×
• Com. v. Maldonado-Vallespil, J.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2019-12-20· cited 1×

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Henderson
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1973-05-04· cited 93×
• State v. Raffone
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1971-04-20· cited 50×
• Williams v. Superior Court
  California Court of Appeal· 1978-05-25· cited 36×
• Commonwealth v. Farrar
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1979-10-26· cited 35×
• Commonwealth v. Hawkins
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1982-01-05· cited 34×
• Commonwealth v. Carroll
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1971-12-08· cited 34×
• State v. Lawrence
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1981-11-20· cited 30×
• People v. Dickerson
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1975-11-17· cited 23×
• Commonwealth v. Nesbitt
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1980-02-29· cited 20×
• Commonwealth v. King
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1974-03-25· cited 18×
• State v. Ellerbe
  Supreme Court of Louisiana· 1950-05-29· cited 14×
• People v. Dickerson
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1974-03-06· cited 13×
• State v. Hoffman
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1973-12-03· cited 11×