Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 269 SW2D 247 - Rowe v. Commonwealth

Rowe v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2012

11 state decisions

401954196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Commonwealth · Edwards v. Commonwealth · Taylor 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The attorney for the Commonwealth may not deliberately inject into the case an issue prejudicial to the rights of defendant without some reasonable basis for the questions. Taylor v. Com., 269 Ky. 656, 108 S.W.2d 645 . It is rather apparent in this instance the prosecutor knew he could not connect appellant with the ownership or use of this knife, as he made no effort to do so. It occurs to us his only purpose in referring to the knife was to prejudice appellant before the jury. We have many times condemned unfair methods of a prosecutor to obtain convictions because it brings the courts into disrepute and is disgusting to those who look upon courts and judges as symbols of justice. Two somewhat recent cases are Edwards v. Com., 298 Ky. 366 , 182 S.W.2d 948 and Jackson v. Com., 301 Ky. 562 , 192 S.W.2d 480 .””
    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.