Com. v. Garrett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[Wjith respect to a diagnosis of “Paraphilia, Not Otherwise Specified... Sexual Abuse of Child” in this case, the three carnal knowledge petitions standing alone were legally insufficient to permit Dr. Gravers to draw the inference that Garrett had in fact committed those offenses in the absence of any additional evidence concerning the circumstances surrounding the Commonwealth’s decision to dismiss those petitions.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Com. v. Wynn · Commonwealth v. Reed

2. “met the statutory criteria for a sexually violent predator... based not only on Garrett’s performance on the standardized tests and his single conviction for rape, but also on the allegations of the camal knowledge offenses and the other nonsexual offenses contained in the J&DR court files pertaining to Garrett. According to Dr. Gravers, she considered the petitions charging Garrett with unlawful camal knowledge to be significant even though the petitions had been dismissed because . . -. clinicians know that many charges tend to get pleaded down or through the criminal justice system might get nol pressed, parts of plea bargaining. . . . [T]he charges frequently are actually representative of the actual behavior, while the conviction may not necessarily represent the actual behavior that took place. 1 Dr. Gravers further testified that she also considered the nonsexual offenses in Garrett’s juvenile and adult records, including offenses that had been dismissed by nolle prosequi, in reaching her diagnosis that Garrett had an “Antisocial Personality Disorder,” which in her opinion increased the likelihood that he would commit further acts of a sexually violent nature.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Reed

3. “We do not challenge Dr. Gravers’ assertion that mental health professionals will frequently rely upon judicial records indicating that charged conduct did not result in a final determination of guilt as nonetheless being indicative of the subject’s antisocial behavior. As Code § 37.2-906(C) permits consideration of unadjudicated [sic] “charges,” there undoubtedly will be instances in which additional attendant facts would permit a clinician to make a diagnosis of “Antisocial Personality Disorder” with confidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Reed