Johnson v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 111 state decisions

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

1. “a warrant will be tested for `staleness' by considering whether the facts alleged in the warrant provided probable cause to believe, at the time the search actually was conducted, that the search conducted pursuant to the warrant would lead to the discovery of evidence of criminal activity.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Najee Finique Hairston v. Commonwealth of Virginia · 42 Va. App. 481 - Anzualda v. Commonwealth

2. “[O]ne of the issues upon which “other crimes” evidence may be admitted is that of the perpetrator’s identity, or criminal agency, where that has been disputed. Proof of modus operandi is competent evidence where there is a disputed issue of identity. [E]vidence of other crimes, to qualify for admission as proof of modus operandi, need not bear such an exact resemblance to the crime on trial as to constitute a “signature.” Rather, it is sufficient if the other crimes bear a “singular strong resemblance to the pattern of the offense charged.” That test is met where the other incidents are “sufficiently idiosyncratic to permit an inference of pattern for purposes of proof,” thus tending to establish the probability of a common perpetrator. If the evidence of other crimes bears sufficient marks of similarity to the crime charged to establish that the defendant is probably the common perpetrator, that evidence is relevant and admissible if its probative value outweighs its prejudicial effect .... The trial court, in the exercise of its sound discretion, must decide which of these competing considerations outweighs the other. Unless that discretion has been clearly abused, we will affirm the trial court’s decision on this issue.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Turner v. Commonwealth · Scott v. Com.

3. “On July 11, 1994, the nude body of 22-year-old Hope Denise Hall was found on the bedroom floor of her apartment in Petersburg. She had been stabbed 15 times, including fatal stab wounds to her back, chest, and neck. Hall’s body had abrasions on the nose and left cheek. The body also had a broken, ragged fingernail that Dr. Deborah Kay, an assistant chief medical examiner for the Commonwealth, testified was a “defense-type” injury. Dr. Kay also testified that death “is not generally immediate” with wounds such as those suffered by Hall, and that she initially would have remained conscious after the wounds were inflicted. The police found blood on two “steak” knives, which were lying on a counter in Hall’s kitchen. Blood was also found on a piece of a broken drinking glass located on the kitchen counter, and there was additional blood on the kitchen counter and floor. The police recovered from the kitchen floor an earring, five strands of hair, and a partial shoe print containing some blood. The matching earring was found in Hall’s bedroom. The outside door to Hall’s apartment was locked, and the police found a partial fingerprint and smears of blood on the inside panel of that door, which was located near the kitchen. The police recovered two additional “steak” knives, one on Hall’s bed and one in her bathroom. The telephone wires in her bedroom had been pulled out of the wall. A smear of blood and blood splatters were located on the bedroom wall near the victim’s body. The po”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Johnson v. Commonwealth