Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 271 Va. 486 - Orndorff v. Com.

Orndorff v. Com.’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
4
states following
February 2021
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably Grattan v. Com. (2009), Avent v. Com. (2010)

29 state decisions

190200620102020decided

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 Dusky v. United States · Godinez v. Moran · Stockton v. Commonwealth · United States v. Robinson · Odum 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) appears to have been discovered subsequent to the trial; (2) could not have been secured for use at the trial in the exercise of reasonable diligence by the movant; (3) is not merely cumulative, corroborative or collateral; and (4) is material, and such as should produce opposite results on the merits at another trial.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “is a matter submitted to the sound discretion of the circuit court and will be granted only under unusual circumstances after particular care and caution has been given to the evidence presented.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “), a mental illness she contends would serve as the basis for a defense of insanity if accepted by the jury. [2] In this appeal, we consider whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the circuit court properly denied Orndorff's motion for a new trial on the ground that she had not met her burden of showing that this after-discovered evidence was”
    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.