Soto v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2023 · most notably McKaney v. Foreman (2004), Brewer v. Commonwealth (2006)
53 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1168 · 18 U.S.C. § 2119 · 18 U.S.C. § 3593 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Almendarez-Torres v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Barker v. Wingo
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“KRE 106 is a rule of admission, not exclusion.... It does not require the exclusion of a relevant portion of a document because other portions cannot be found.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) A person is guilty of burglary in the first degree when, with the intent to commit a crime, he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building, and when in effecting entry or while in the building or in the immediate flight therefrom, he or another participant in the crime: (a) Is armed with explosives or a deadly weapon; or (b) Causes physical injury to any person who is not a participant in the crime; or (c) Uses or threatens the use of a dangerous instrument against any person who is not a participant in the crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A determination whether to excuse a juror for cause lies within the sound discretion of the trial court and is reviewed only for a clear abuse of discretion.”
2 later decisions 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.