Commonwealth v. Grey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 federal appellate · 12 district · 125 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 154 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “... [Mjalice aforethought may be inferred if, in the circumstances known to the defendant, a reasonably prudent person would have known that according to the common experience there was a strong and plain likelihood that death would follow the contemplated act.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Eagles · COMMONWEALTH v. RONNIE M. HARRIS.

2. “Malice aforethought includes any unexcused intent to kill [prong 1], to do grievous bodily harm [prong 2], or to do an act creating a plain and strong likelihood that death or grievous harm will follow [prong 3]. So, in order to convict a defendant of murder in the first degree, other than felony murder, the Commonwealth must prove that the defendant unjustifiably killed another, and that he intended to kill or to do grievous bodily harm to the victim, or that he intended to do ,an act creating a plain and strong likelihood that the victim’s' death or grievous harm would follow.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Avellar v. Dubois

3. “Our current rule in particular circumstances might permit a defendant to be convicted who, because of intoxication, totally lacked a specific criminal intent, thus raising a constitutional due process issue. An absolute rule that bars consideration of relevant evidence bearing on a defendant’s capacity to have a specific intent is, in any event, arbitrary.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Robinson v. Ponte