Commonwealth v. Repoza’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
3 district · 60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably Commonwealth v. Amirault (1997), Commonwealth v. Gunter (1998)
3 district · 60 state decisions
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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Sandstrom v. Montana · Francis v. Franklin · Hankerson v. North Carolina · Commonwealth v. Saferian
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[T]he Supreme Court . . . has ruled that, in cases involving burden-shifting instructions, States may ‘insulate past convictions by enforcing the normal and valid rule that failure to object to a jury instruction is a waiver of any claim of error.’ Hankerson, supra at 244 n.8. . . . As a matter of State law, we have determined that we would not require lawyers to be clairvoyant and to object to instructions not yet identified as constitutional error.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Francis determines that a reviewing court cannot have confidence in the propriety of a subsequent verdict of guilty unless some other portion of the charge not only contradicts the incorrect language but, through explanation, harmonizes it with the entire charge as well.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Because Francis develops the method by which appellate courts should review and evaluate a Sandstrom error, its holding is fully retroactive.”
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.