Commonwealth v. Raposo’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably Commonwealth v. Green (1995), Commonwealth v. Ortiz (1997)
28 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 Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc. v. Blankenship · United States v. Peoni · Pope v. Nebraska · Commonwealth v. Welansky · 129 Wis. 2d 239 - State v. Williquette
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In order to be found guilty as an accessory before the fact, the evidence must prove . . . that the defendant must “in some sort associate himself with the venture, that he participate in it as in something that he wishes to bring about, [and] that he seek by his action to make it succeed.” . . . We have held that the plain language of the statute, involving aiding, counselling, hiring or otherwise procuring a principal to commit the crime, requires “something more than mere acquiescence,” although not necessarily physical participation, “if there is association with the criminal venture and any significant participation in it.” . . . Moreover, “presence at the scene of the [crime], together with the failure to take affirmative steps to prevent it, does not render a person liable as principal.”... A person cannot be found guilty as an accessory before the fact simply because she knows a crime is going to be committed, even when this knowledge is coupled with her subsequent concealment of the completed crime . .. Therefore, it is clear that what is required to be convicted as an accessory before the fact is not only knowledge of the crime and a shared intent to bring it about, but also some sort of act that contributes to its happening.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Whoever aids in the commission of a felony, or is accessory thereto before the fact by counselling, hiring or otherwise procuring such felony to be committed, shall be punished in the manner provided for the punishment of the principal felon.””
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.