40 Va. App. 176 - Bradbury v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
June 2019
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Justus v. Commonwealth · Breeden v. Commonwealth · Martin v. Commonwealth · Barker v. Commonwealth · Stewart v. Commonwealth
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Proof of a prospective juror's impartiality should come from him and not be based on his mere assent to persuasive suggestions. When asked by the court, a suggestive question produces an even more unreliable response. A juror's desire to say the right thing or to please the authoritative figure of the judge, if encouraged, creates doubt about the candor of the juror's responses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“were leading, long, and complex. They suggested the answer that the [prosecutor] preferred to hear, compressed several issues into one phrase, and generally incorporated several legal concepts. These questions constituted persuasive suggestions more than an impartial inquiry and, as such, were an ineffective means [of conducting voir dire].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the man bears the burden of proving that the woman consented to sex.” In response, the trial judge used”
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.