Cartwright v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 2 Va. App. 590 - Jordan v. Commonwealth (1986), Kelsoe v. Commonwealth (1983)
54 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
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 963
Relies on Albernaz v. United States · Braverman v. United States · Jones v. Commonwealth · Gough v. Shaner · Falden 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““§ 18.2-22. Conspiracy to commit felony. — (a) If any person shall conspire, confederate or combine with another, . . . to commit a felony ... he shall be guilty of a felony which shall be punishable as follows: (1) Every person who so conspires to commit an offense which is punishable by death shall be guilty of a Class 3 felony; (2) Every person who so conspires to commit an offense which is a noncapital felony shall be guilty of a Class 5 felony; and (3) Every person who so conspires to commit an offense the maximum punishment for which is confinement in the penitentiary for a period of less than five years shall be confined in the penitentiary for a period of one year, or . . . may be confined in jail not exceeding twelve months and fined not exceeding $500, either or both. (d) The penalty provisions of this section shall not apply to any person who conspires to commit any offense defined in Chapter 15.1 (§ 54-524.1 et seq.) of Title 54 or of Article 1 (§ 18.2-247 et seq.), Chapter 7 of this title. The penalty for any such violation shall be as provided in § 18.2-256.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Likewise, we conclude that the legislature, in enacting [the drug conspiracy statute] determined that all drug conspiracies are not the same. Conspiracies to commit more serious drug offenses are to be punished more severely. The legislative intent is implicit in the statutory reference to punishment “which may not be less than the minimum punishment nor exceed the maximum punishment prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.” To determine the applicable penalty in an agreement to distribute marijuana, cocaine, and preludin, there must be reference to the penalty for each of the individual substantive offenses that are the objects of the conspiracy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the rule of lenity serves only to resolve genuine, plausible ambiguities and “does not abrogate the well-recognized canon that a statute ... should be read and applied so as to accord with the purpose intended and attain the objects desired if that may be accomplished without doing harm to its language.””
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.