Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 140 SW3D 510 - St. Clair v. Commonwealth

St. Clair v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
7
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Breton v. Commissioner of Correction (2017), Brown v. Commonwealth (2010)

1 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

220200420102020decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Barker v. Wingo · Faretta v. California · Neil v. Biggers · United States v. Agurs

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

  1. “[t]he offense of murder or kidnapping was committed by a person with a prior record of conviction for a capital offense. . . .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a plea of guilty accepted by the trial court or a jury's or judge's verdict [sic] of guilty.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “(1) Trooper Bennett’s identification of [St. Clair] as the man who had fired two shots in his direction on the night of the murder; (2) another man’s identification of [St. Clair] and Reese as being in possession of a vehicle similar to Brady’s vehicle at a gas station/convenience store in the area; (3) testimony relating to telephone calls made to [St. Clair’s] friends and relatives back in Oklahoma from a payphone located at this same gas station/convenience store; (4) testimony identifying items found in Kentucky — on the victim’s person and in his pickup truck — as similar to or the same items that [St. Clair’s] then-wife had given to [St. Clair] and Reese when she met them in Texas; (5) a jailhouse informant, Scott Kincaid (“Kincaid”), who testified that [St. Clair] had admitted his involvement in the crime; (6) ballistics evidence demonstrating that the same handgun could have fired the shots that killed both Keeling and Brady and damaged Trooper Bennett’s cruiser and bullet composition evidence suggesting that bullets from the same box killed Keeling and Brady; and (7) testimony to the effect that [St. Clair’s] fingerprints were found both on items recovered from inside the Brady vehicle and on the outside door of the same vehicle.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.