Commonwealth v. Lawrence’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
May 2025
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Cronic · Commonwealth Ex Rel. Washington v. Maroney · Gateway Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is settled that it is improper for a prosecutor to express a personal belief as to the credibility of the defendant or other witnesses. However, the prosecutor may comment on the credibility of witnesses. Further, a prosecutor is allowed to respond to defense arguments with logical force and vigor. If defense counsel has attacked the credibility of witnesses in closing, the prosecutor may present argument addressing the witnesses' credibility. Thus, proper examination of the comments of the assistant district attorney in closing requires review of the arguments advanced by the defense in defense summation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake, the evidence has proven clearly that you have been sitting in this room for the past week with a murderer. A murderer, that's what he is. We can say it now. (N.T. 2/8/11 p. 100). Brief for Appellant at 44. 8 It is axiomatic that "vouching is a form of prosecutorial misconduct, occurring when a prosecutor places the government's prestige behind a witness through personal assurances as to the witness's truthfulness, and when it suggests that information not before the jury supports the witness's testimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“... [I]n any case where an accomplice implicates the defendant, the judge should tell the jury that the accomplice is a corrupt and polluted source whose testimony should be viewed with great caution.... The 'corrupt source' charge in particular is designed specifically to address situations where one accomplice testifies against the other to obtain favorable treatment. It directs the jury to view the testimony of an accomplice with disfavor and accept it only with care and caution.”
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.