Commonwealth v. Grant’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Commonwealth v. Wilson (1998), Commonwealth v. Gunter (1998)
57 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 Liotta v. National Forge Co. · Armedo-Sarmiento v. United States · Commonwealth v. Domanski · Commonwealth v. McLaughlin · Commonwealth v. Sellon
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The exception to the hearsay rule which admits hearsay consisting of spontaneous exclamations 'is based on the experience that, under certain external circumstances of physical shock, a stress of nervous excitement may be produced which stills the reflective faculties and removes their control, so that the utterance which then occurs is a spontaneous and sincere response to the actual sensations and perceptions already produced by the external shock. Since this utterance is made under the immediate and uncontrolled domination of the senses, and during the brief period when considerations of self-interest could not have been brought fully to bear by reasoned reflection, the utterance may be taken as particularly trustworthy (or, at least, as lacking the usual grounds of untrustworthiness), and thus as expressing the real tenor of the speaker's belief as to the facts just observed by him; and may therefore be received as testimony to those facts.' Wigmore on Evidence (3d ed.) § 1747."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to remain passive, and to insist that the Commonwealth prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt without explanation or denial by him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“adequacy of instructions must be determined in light of their over-all impact on the jury”
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.