33 Va. App. 796 - Williams v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
April 2002
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Coleman v. Commonwealth · Commonwealth v. Layton · 17 Va. App. 233 - Jones v. Commonwealth · 15 Va. App. 196 - Timmons v. Commonwealth · 94 Wash. App. 151 - State v. Anderson
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A weapon that expels a projectile (such as a bullet or pellets) by the combustion of gunpowder or other explosive.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“The Commonwealth must initially prove that the accused possessed an object manufactured for the purpose of expelling a projectile by an explosion, namely, a firearm. It then must prove that the firearm is operational or can readily be made operational.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[I]t is concerned with preventing a person, who is known to have committed a serious crime in the past, from becoming dangerously armed, regardless of whether that person uses, displays, or conceals the firearm.”
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.