Ward v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
73 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably State v. Coleman (1965), Satcher v. Commonwealth (1992)
73 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 Escobedo v. Illinois · Pointer v. United States · Snyder v. Commonwealth · Snead v. Smyth · Karnes 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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question as to whether the error is sufficiently prejudicial to the rights of the defendant to require a reversal of the case for a new trial . . . depends upon two chief considerations: first, whether timely objection was interposed at trial, and second, whether the court cured the error by immediately instructing the jury to disregard the evidence as being improper.” [Citations omitted] Ward, supra, 205 Va. at 573 , 138 S. E. 2d at 300 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An indictment for murder in the first degree under this Code section need not charge specifically the facts showing the offense. The form of an indictment for murder employed in this case [the specified short form] is sufficient to charge murder in the first and second degree or any lower grade of homicide. It is not necessary that the indictment should charge murder in the first degree or use that description which, according to the statute, constitutes that degree of offense. Id. at 205 Va. 568 , 138 S.E.2d at 296 . [Emphasis added].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“one not the perpetrator of the crime, who is present, aiding and abetting the act done, or keeping watch or guard at some convenient distance.”
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.