Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 24 Va. App. 577 - Williams v. Commonwealth

24 Va. App. 577 - Williams v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
6
states following
October 2011
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Michel v. United States · Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co. · Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp. · Colgrove v. Battin · Strouth v. Tennessee

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he function of a jury is to assure a fair and equitable resolution of all factual issues. The jury serves as the final arbiter of the facts, `charged with weighing the evidence, judging the credibility of the witnesses, and reaching a verdict' in the case.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “We do not discourage trial judges from exercising their discretion to permit juror questioning, provided they adopt procedures that assure control over the process and avoid the pitfalls that have potential for prejudice.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the trial court, in the exercise of its sound discretion, may permit jurors to submit written questions to be asked of a witness.”
    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.