36 Va. App. 375 - Hill v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
September 2002
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Alexander v. United States · McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco · Rosales-Lopez v. United States · Ristaino v. Ross
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY]: You could give [the defendant] a fair trial? “[MEMBER OF THE VENIRE]: Yes, I could. “[DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY]: .... You heard [the Commonwealth’s Attorney] state the charge. I just want to ask you if you can consider the full range of penalty for the charges? The charges carry a minimum of five years to — “[COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY]: Objection. “THE COURT: Objection sustained. You can have your exception. Let’s move on. “[DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY]: Judge, my client has a right to a fair and impartial jury under his Fourth and Sixth Amendment [r]ights. “THE COURT: I am very familiar with those. All right. Let’s move on. “[DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY]: If I can just preserve for the record. He has the right to an impartial jury that is impartial not only to the issue of guilt but also the question of punishment, and I should be able to — “THE COURT: I have ruled. Don’t argue. Take your exception and go on to your next question.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Commonwealth v. Hill““The court and counsel for either party shall have the right to examine under oath any person who is called as a juror therein and shall have the right to ask such person or juror directly any relevant question to ascertain whether he is related to either party, or has any interest in the cause, or has expressed or formed any opinion, or is sensible of any bias or prejudice therein; and the party objecting to any juror may introduce any competent evidence in support of the objection; and if it shall appear to the court that the juror does not stand indifferent in the cause, another shall be drawn or called and placed in his stead for the trial of that case.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Commonwealth v. Hill
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.