Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 Va. App. 746 - James v. Commonwealth

18 Va. App. 746 - James v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
5
states following
November 2015
most recently cited

63 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently November 2015 · most notably Commonwealth v. Lopez (1998), 24 Va. App. 30 - McBride v. Commonwealth (1997)

63 state decisions

290199420002010decided

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 Boykin v. Alabama · McCarthy v. United States · Burgett v. Texas · Marshall v. Lonberger · Henderson v. Morgan

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

  1. “appeared on its face to be a valid final judgment,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““A silent record or mere naked assertion by an accused” that his constitutional rights were violated is “insufficient” to rebut the presumption of validity. Here, the transcript established [Nicely’s] previous misdemeanor conviction, without suggestion of imprisonment [or imposition of a suspended sentence], a circumstance which did not implicate the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in a collateral review of the conviction and entitled the Commonwealth to the presumption of regularity without offending due process.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “`[E]ven when a collateral attack on a final conviction rests on constitutional grounds, the presumption of regularity that attaches to final judgments makes it appropriate [for the fact finder to presume that the conviction was obtained in compliance with the defendant's right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment and] to assign a proof burden to the defendant. '”
    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.