33 Va. App. 619 - Barnes v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “When weighing the evidence, the fact finder is not required to accept entirely either party's account of the facts. The fact finder may reject that which it finds implausible, yet accept other parts which it finds to be believable.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 56 Va. App. 391 - Turner v. Commonwealth · 54 Va. App. 458 - Turner v. Commonwealth

2. “`it [is] for the fact finder to determine in each case . . . whether the [abduction] had been terminated within the purview of [Code § 18.2-32].'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 56 Va. App. 391 - Turner v. Commonwealth · 54 Va. App. 458 - Turner v. Commonwealth

3. ““The [felony-murder] doctrine was developed to elevate to murder a homicide committed during the course of a felony by imputing malice to the killing. The justification for imputing malice was the theory that the increased risk of death or serious harm occasioned by the commission of a felony demonstrated the felon’s lack of concern for human life.... The purpose of the doctrine was to deter inherently dangerous felonies by holding the felons responsible for the consequences of the felony, whether intended or not.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 61 Va. App. 610 - Carlos Abraham Martinelly Montano, s/k/a, etc. v. Commonwealth of Virginia