Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 17 Va. App. 349 - Neeley v. Commonwealth

17 Va. App. 349 - Neeley v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Hoke v. Jd Netherland Hoke (1996), 40 Va. App. 271 - Cairns v. Commonwealth (2003)

23 state decisions

140199320002010decided

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 Chambers v. Mississippi · Pointer v. Texas · Jenkins v. McKeithen · United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal · 12 Va. App. 1003 - Lavinder 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a defendant cannot be deprived of the opportunity to put his evidence and version of the facts before the jury so "as to deprive a criminal defendant of his Sixth Amendment right to confront and cross-examine his accuser and to call witnesses in his defense," or simply because the trial court finds the prosecutrix's version more credible than the defendant.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “limited to evidence designed to explain the presence of semen, pregnancy, disease, or physical injury to the complaining witness's intimate parts,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “offered to provide an alternative explanation for physical evidence of the offense charged.”
    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.