ABOD v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably 31 Cal. 4th 179 - People v. Floyd (2003), Lane v. Commonwealth (1982)
47 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 Brulotte Et Al. v. Thys Company · Bradley v. United States · Bell v. State of Maryland · 28 Ill. 2d 322 - The People v. Hansen · Sigmon 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen a statute prescribes a maximum imprisonment penalty and the sentence does not exceed that maximum, the sentence will not be overturned as being an abuse of discretion.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"When the General Assembly reduced the penalty for the offense of manufacturing phencyclidine it did not enact accompanying legislation extending the benefit of the mitigating effect of the statute beyond that provided for in Code § 1-16. 2 We see no constitutional question involved in this case. The fact that the legislature reduces the penalty for a crime after a prisoner is sentenced, and he does not benefit from that mitigation of punishment, does not constitute an arbitrary classification or deny the prisoner equal protection of the law. Here the legislature, in the exercise of its reasonable legislative determination, has seen fit to draw the line of demarcation at the point where final judgment is pronounced and entered. It cannot be said that to draw it at this point is more arbitrary than at some other stage in the criminal process. Bradley v. United States , 410 U.S. 605 . . . (1973)."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f any penalty, forfeiture, or punishment be mitigated by any provision of the new law, such provision may, with the consent of the party affected, be applied to any judgment pronounced after the new law takes effect.”
2 later decisions 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.