Bolden v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
November 2015
most recently cited
24 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Florida v. Royer · United States v. Mendenhall · McCain v. Commonwealth · Reittinger 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress evidence claiming a violation of a person's Fourth Amendment rights, we consider the facts in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the prevailing party at trial. The burden is on the defendant to show that the trial court committed reversible error. We are bound by the trial court's factual findings unless those findings are plainly wrong or unsupported by the evidence.... [A]n appellate court "should take care both to review findings of historical fact only for clear error and to give due weight to inferences drawn from those facts by resident judges and local law enforcement officers."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jones v. Com.
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.