McDonald v. Com.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 22 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he fact that separate statutes may overlap in their proscription of specific conduct does not detract from their independent enforcement except when double jeopardy concerns are implicated. “[W]hen an act violates more than one criminal statute, the Government may prosecute under either so long as it does not discriminate against any class of defendants.” United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114, 123-24 , 99 S.Ct. 2198 , [2204,] 60 L.Ed.2d 755 (1979); see also Muhammad v. Commonwealth, 269 Va. 451, 501-02 , 619 S.E.2d 16, 45 (2005). “Whether to prosecute and what charge to file or bring before a grand jury are decisions that generally rest in the prosecutor’s discretion.” Batchelder, 442 U.S. at 124 , 99 S.Ct. [at 2204],”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 51 Va. App. 137 - George v. Commonwealth · Jones v. Commonwealth

2. “the arguments of the parties on appeal ... must be limited to issues preserved in the trial court ... and to issues presented before the appellate courts[;] an appellate court may not reverse a judgment of the trial court based upon an alleged error in a decision that was not made or upon an issue that was not presented”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kellermann v. McDonough · Kellermann v. McDonough

3. “[i]t is important to note that this case does not involve minors, non-consensual activity, prostitution, or public activity. The Lawrence court indicated that state regulation of that type of activity might support a different result. Our holding, like that of the Supreme Court in Lawrence , addresses only private, consensual conduct between adults and the respective statutes' impact on such conduct. Our holding does not affect the Commonwealth's police power regarding regulation of public fornication, prostitution, or other such crimes.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Robinson v. Salvation Army