Roark v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2008 · most notably Dawkins v. Commonwealth (1947), Barber v. Commonwealth (1965)
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 Maulding v. Commonwealth · People v. Crenshaw · McAndrews v. People · State v. Hyland · Commonwealth v. Lisowski
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The gravamen of the accused’s contention is that the Commonwealth failed to establish the specific intent to maim, disable and kill, and that no such intent may be presumed from the blows struck with the naked fist. The accused relies upon [Roark], wherein it was held that under ordinary circumstances no malice may be presumed by a blow from the fist even though death results. “However, an assault with the bare fists may be attended with such circumstances of violence and brutality that an intent to kill will be presumed.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Ordinarily, the fist is not regarded as a dangerous or deadly weapon. Hence, usually, death is not held to be a natural and probable result of a blow with the bare fist. Under ordinary circumstances no malice may be inferred from such a blow even though death results. However, an assault with the bare fist may be attended with such circumstances of violence and brutality that an intent to kill will be presumed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.