Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 23 Va. App. 242 - Strohecker v. Commonwealth

23 Va. App. 242 - Strohecker v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
October 2008
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on O'Dell v. Commonwealth · Evans v. Commonwealth · Pierce v. Commonwealth · Owens v. Commonwealth · Karnes 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Code § 19.2-319 provides for the postponement of the execution of a sentence in order to give “a fair opportunity to apply for a writ of error.” Ramey , [145 Va.] at 851, 133 S.E. at 756 . Here, appellant made no assertion to the trial court that he needed additional time to prepare his petition for appeal; rather, from appellant’s motion it appears that he misconstrued the statute, requesting that execution of his sentence be postponed “pending action by the Court of Appeals.... ” Code § 19.2-319 provides for no such relief. We [thus] find no prejudice to appellant by the trial court’s refusal to suspend execution of this sentence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the statement must have been such, and made under such circumstances, as would naturally call for a reply.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “For the adoptive admission exception to apply, a direct accusation is not needed.”
    1 later decision 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.