Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 276 Va. 176 - Gibson v. Com.

Gibson v. Com.’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
May 2017
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 1101 · 26 U.S.C. § 7202

Relies on Conyers v. MARTIAL ARTS WORLD OF RICHMOND · United States v. Thayer · United States v. Evangelista · Riverside Hosp., Inc. v. Johnson · Moreau v. Fuller

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The record reveals no additional requests or motions for deferral [of disposition]. Consequently, the trial court never denied such a request or motion. Accordingly, the issue present in Gibson’s fourth assignment of error, namely that the trial court “erred by not recognizing the courts [sic] authority to defer findings of guilt absent a specific legislative grant of authority” is not properly before us because the record reflects no ruling of the trial court to that effect. We note that although the Court of Appeals addresses this issue in its opinion, the question was not properly before the Court of Appeals for the same reason.”
    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.