Commonwealth v. Sands’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
September 2018
most recently cited
29 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on LeVasseur v. Commonwealth · Levasseur v. Wainwright · Yarborough v. Commonwealth · Hatcher v. Commonwealth · McCullough v. McCullough
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'an immediate, real threat to one's safety ....' " 2 Commonwealth v. Sands , 262 Va. 724 , 729, 553 S.E.2d 733 , 736 (2001) (quoting Black's Law Dictionary 399 (7th ed. 1999)). See United States v. Crittendon , 883 F.2d 326 , 329-30 (4th Cir. 1989) (finding no evidence to show present or imminent threat of death or injury despite a generalized fear of danger); Byrd v. Commonwealth , 89 Va. 536 , 539, 16 S.E. 727 , 729 (1893) ("There must be ... some act menacing present peril ... [and] the act ... must be of such a character as to afford a reasonable ground for believing there is a design ... to do some serious bodily harm, and imminent danger of carrying such design into immediate execution.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Because the trial court refused to grant the instruction proffered by the accused, we view the facts in the light most favorable to the defendant. Commonwealth v. Alexander, 260 Va. 238, 240 , 531 S.E.2d 567, 568 (2000). However, an instruction is proper only if supported by more than a scintilla of evidence. Commonwealth v. Donkor, 256 Va. 443, 445 , 507 S.E.2d 75, 76 (1998). If the instruction is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case, it should not be given. Hatcher v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 811, 813-14 , 241 S.E.2d 756, 758 (1978) (citing Banner v. Commonwealth, 204 Va. 640, 647 , 133 S.E.2d 305, 310 (1963)).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Com. v. Cary · Avent v. Com.“sufficient time elapsed for [the sister-in-law] to arrive at the couple's home, and for the defendant to view the extent of her injuries while in the bathroom with [the sister-in-law], walk from the bathroom to the living room door, turn around and proceed back into the kitchen, retrieve a gun from a cabinet, and walk back into the bedroom where her husband was reclining on the bed, watching television.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Com. v. Cary
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.