Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 22 Va. App. 508 - Jenkins v. Commonwealth

22 Va. App. 508 - Jenkins v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
September 1997
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Alexander v. United States · McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco · Higginbotham v. Commonwealth · Prejean v. Blackburn · 12 Va. App. 1003 - Lavinder 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Part of the difficulty in ‘not-for-truth’ situations is due to the fact that often such evidence will have a dual nature; the declaration may indeed be relevant on some matter unrelated to the truth of the content of the statement, and yet the content of the statement may go to the issues of the case as well. See, e.g., Donahue v. Commonwealth, [ 225 Va. 145 , 300 S.E.2d 768 (1983) ]. This is perhaps the situation which creates the greatest dilemma for the courts. In that regard, however, it should be remembered that it is a time-honored principle of evidence law that, in general, if evidence is admissible for any purpose, it is admissible.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.