Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 Mass. App. Ct. 668 - Commonwealth v. Cook

10 Mass. App. Ct. 668 - Commonwealth v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently December 2013

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 17 state decisions

801980199020002010decided

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 Pinkerton v. United States · Pereira v. United States · Iannelli v. United States · Nye & Nissen v. United States · Commonwealth v. Latimore

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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “agree(ment) to work in concert for the criminal or corrupt or unlawful purpose.” Commonwealth v. Cook, 10 Mass.App.Ct. 668, 674 , 411 N.E.2d 1326 (1980). Joint venture, on the other hand, requires that "the defendant was present at the scene, that he assented to the crime occurring, and that he put himself in a position where he could render aid to the perpetrator if it should become necessary.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Whoever aids in the commission of a felony, or is accessory thereto before the fact by counselling, hiring or otherwise procuring such felony to be committed, shall be punished in the manner provided for the punishment of the principal felon.”
    1 later decision 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.