Ortiz v. Com.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “only upon a showing of abuse of discretion and resulting prejudice to the [party who claims an abuse of discretion].”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Herrington v. Commonwealth · Reyes v. Commonwealth

2. “evidence of acts of incestuous intercourse between the parties other than those charged in the indictment, whether prior or subsequent thereto, is, if not too remote in point of time, admissible for the purpose of throwing light upon the relations of the parties and the incestuous disposition of the defendant toward the other party, and to corroborate the proof of the act relied upon for conviction. The fact that some of the other offenses were remote in point of time from the act under investigation does not itself render such evidence incompetent where the acts were repeatedly done up to a comparatively recent point and were all apparently inspired by one purpose.”

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

3. “resulted in a fundamentally unfair trial and denied her due process of law. The jury clearly knew that they were jurors at a murder trial. The question at issue was whether Thomas had committed the murder. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Thomas' motion in limine seeking that the use of the word”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Thomas v. Com.