Commonwealth v. a Juvenile’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 103 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 111 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably Commonwealth v. Soares (1979), Connecticut v. Porter (1997)
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 103 state decisions — followed in 21 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schmerber v. State of California · Counselman v. Hitchcock · Cupp v. Naughten · State v. Valdez
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 111 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Basic to all that has been said with regard to the utility and accuracy of the Polygraph technique is the matter of examiner qualifications. “An examiner must be an intelligent person, with a reasonably good educational background — preferably a college degree. He should have an intense interest in the work itself, a good practical understanding of human nature, and suitable personality traits which may be evident from his otherwise general ability to ‘get along’ with people and to be well liked by his friends and associates. No amount of training or experience will overcome the lack of these necessary qualifications. “Many persons now functioning as Polygraph examiners do not possess these basic qualifications. . . . “In our judgment the required period for the training of an examiner is 6 months. Moreover, it must be individualized training from a competent, experienced examiner or examiners with a sufficient volume of actual cases to permit the trainee to make frequent observations of Polygraph examinations and to conduct tests himself under the instructor’s personal supervision. . . . “Mastering the Polygraph technique is no simple matter. It requires much time and effort. In fact it requires all of one’s working time and energy. . . .” (Notes omitted.) Wisconsin has no law providing for the licensing, regulating and disciplining of polygraph operators.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““In sum, despite very significant progress in recent years, the field of polygraphy is still challenged forcefully on theoretical grounds and has yet to achieve a predictable level of consistency among examiners. For these reasons we do not believe that at this time polygraph test results should be generally admissible in evidence in criminal trials.” [365 Mass, at 429, 313 N.E.2d at 125 ]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““To compel a person to submit to testing in which an effort will be made to determine his guilt or innocence on the basis of physiological responses, whether willed or not, is to evoke the spirit and history of the Fifth Amendment.” [384 U.S. at 764, 16 L. Ed. 2d at 916, 86 S.Ct. at 1832]”
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.