Hodge v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 58 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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[i]n a given situation, the accused, without producing evidence, may be entitled to an instruction on manslaughter, or even to a verdict on that lesser charge, if it can reasonably be inferred from the Commonwealth’s evidence that he acted in the heat of passion. Where the Commonwealth’s evidence does not permit such an inference, however, the burden of production shifts to the accused. But when he produces some credible evidence that he acted in the heat of passion, he is entitled to an instruction on manslaughter and also, if the evidence as a whole raises a reasonable doubt that he acted maliciously, to a verdict on the lesser charge of homicide.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lee v. Clarke

2. “if the prosecution established that the homicide was both intentional and unlawful, malice aforethought was to be conclusively implied unless the defendant proved by a fair preponderance of the evidence that he acted in the heat of passion on sudden provocation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wilson v. Commonwealth

3. “Once the Commonwealth has proved there was an unlawful killing, then you are entitled to infer there was malice unless, from all the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt as to whether malice existed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Thomas v. Com.