32 Va. App. 200 - McLean v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 12 Va. App. 1003 - Lavinder v. Commonwealth · 14 Va. App. 454 - Hooker v. Commonwealth · 16 Va. App. 913 - Ragland v. Commonwealth · Faison v. Hudson · McMillan 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The introduction of a prior consistent statement of a witness is not [permitted] merely because the testimony of a second witness calls the veracity of the first witness into doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ruhlin v. Samaan“to allow the admission of a prior consistent statement after impeachment of just `any sort' would create an unreasonably `loose rule.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ruhlin v. Samaan
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.