Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 178 SW3D 500 - Wood v. Commonwealth

Wood v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
5
states following
May 2022
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 2022

10 state decisions

80200520102020decided

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 Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Kolender v. Lawson · Jurek v. Texas · Walton v. Arizona · Lewis v. Jeffers

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

  1. “First, the underlying criminal purpose must be the commission of a crime defined outside of KRS 509. Second, the interference with the victim’s liberty must have occurred immediately with or incidental to the commission of the underlying intended crime. Third, the interference with the victim’s liberty must not exceed that which is ordinarily incident to the commission of the underlying crime. All three prongs must be satisfied in order for the exemption to apply”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.