18 Va. App. 207 - Knight v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably 37 Va. App. 495 - Smoot v. Commonwealth (2002), 27 Va. App. 477 - Jefferson v. Commonwealth (1998)
25 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City · Scherl v. Fisher · Frye 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution also provides that failure to disclose exculpatory evidence may require reversal where the evidence is material to either guilt or punishment. Lowe v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 670, 679 , 239 S.E.2d 112, 118 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 930 , 98 S.Ct. 1502 , 55 L.Ed.2d 526 (1978). Evidence is exculpatory if it is favorable to the accused and “ ‘material only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A “reasonable probability” is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome [of the trial].’ ” Taitano v. Commonwealth, 4 Va.App. 342, 349 , 358 S.E.2d 590, 593-94 (1987) (quoting Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 , 83 S.Ct. 1194, 1196 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963); United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682 , 105 S.Ct. 3375, 3383 , 87 L.Ed.2d 481 (1985)) (other citations omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The purpose of Rule 5A:18 is to provide the trial court with the opportunity to remedy any error so that an appeal is not necessary.”
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.