Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2 Va. App. 358 - Cunningham v. Commonwealth

2 Va. App. 358 - Cunningham v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
October 2016
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently October 2016

24 state decisions

1101986199020002010decided

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 Hoffman v. United States · Rogers v. United States · Namet v. United States · Mandel v. Nouse · Pressed Steel Car Co. v. United States

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

  1. “The question whether the privilege is properly invoked is one for the trial court. As stated by the Supreme Court in Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479 [ 71 S.Ct. 814 , 95 L.Ed. 1118 ] (1951): “The witness is not exonerated from answering merely because he declares that in so doing he would incriminate himself — his say-so does not of itself establish the hazard of incrimination. It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified, ... and to require him to answer if ‘it clearly appears to the court that he is mistaken.’ ” Id. at 486 [ 71 S.Ct. at 818 ] (citations omitted).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he fifth amendment does not provide a blanket right to refuse to answer any questions. Once a witness asserts his fifth amendment right, some investigative questioning must be allowed, for it is well settled that the “prosecutor need not accept at face value every asserted claim of privilege, no matter how frivolous.” Namet v. United States, 373 U.S. 179, 188 [ 83 S.Ct. 1151, 1155 , 10 L.Ed.2d 278 ] (1963).”
    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.