Boyd v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

62 state decisions

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

1. “(1) to prove motive to commit the crime charged; (2) to establish guilty knowledge or to negate good faith; (3) to negate the possibility of mistake or accident; (4) to show the conduct and feeling of the accused toward his victim, or to establish their prior relations; (5) to prove opportunity; (6) to prove identity of the accused as the one who committed the crime where the prior criminal acts are so distinctive as to indicate a modus operandi; or (7) to demonstrate a common scheme or plan where the other crime or crimes constitute a part of a general scheme of which the crime charged is a part.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lockhart v. Com. · Lockhart v. Commonwealth

2. ““Generally, evidence of prior criminal conduct is not admissible except under well defined circumstances. Kirkpatrick v. Commonwealth, 211 Va. 269 , 176 S. E. 2d 802 (1970). The prior sales of heroin were unrelated to the October 26 sale. Hence, the evidence concerning the prior sales does not fall within an exception to the general rule. Its prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value. Therefore, we hold that the evidence of prior sales was not admissible.” 213 Va. at 53 , 189 S. E. 2d at 359-60 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Eccles v. Commonwealth · Wilson v. Com.