16 Va. App. 402 - Craddock v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2014
9 state decisions
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 Turner v. Murray · Ward v. Sentry Title Co. · Cheng v. Commonwealth · Williams v. Commonwealth · Martinez v. Commonwealth
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he recognized purpose of this requirement is to prevent retrials by calling the error to the attention of the trial judge, who may then caution the jury to disregard the inappropriate remarks.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“based on the record, that the trial judge clearly failed to recognize the impropriety of these remarks because he twice failed to sustain appellant's objections thereto.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the admission of improper evidence in a bench trial [could] never result in reversible error.”
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.