Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 209 Va. 574 - Harmon v. Commonwealth

Harmon v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
7
states following
December 2012
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently December 2012 · most notably Turner v. Commonwealth (1980), Breard v. Commonwealth (1994)

3 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

100196919701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 47 U.S.C. § 605

Relies on Burdeau v. McDowell · Rathbun v. United States · Schwartz v. Texas · Lee v. State of Florida · Fuller v. Alaska

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

  1. ““The court and counsel for either party may examine on oath any person who is called as a juror therein and may ask such person or furor directly any relevant question to ascertain whether he is related to either party, or has any interest in the cause, or has expressed or formed any opinion, or is sensible of any bias or prejudice therein; and the party objecting to any juror may introduce any competent evidence in support of the objection; and if it shall appear to the court that the juror does not stand indifferent in the cause, another shall be drawn or called and placed in his stead for the trial of that case.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “it has been firmly settled that such constitutional prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure is applicable to agents of the federal and state governments and not to private individuals acting on their own initiative. Consequently, the rule which excludes evidence obtained by unlawful search because in violation of the Fourth Amendment does not apply where the unlawful search was made by a private individual acting on his own initiative.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in contravention of a statutory enactment.”
    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.