Commonwealth v. Lyons’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
2 district · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Commonwealth v. Degro (2000), Commonwealth v. Freeman (1999)
2 district · 52 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 Dusky v. United States · Commonwealth v. Kozec · Commonwealth v. Yesilciman · Commonwealth v. Mello · Commonwealth v. Sanna
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Although not dispositive, we consider the fact that the defendant did not object to the statements at trial as ‘some indication that the tone [and] manner ... of the now challenged aspects of the prosecutor’s argument were not unfairly prejudicial.’ Commonwealth v. Mello, 420 Mass. 375, 380 (1995), quoting Commonwealth v. Sanchez, 405 Mass. 369, 375 (1989). We review the prosecutor’s remarks in the context of his entire closing argument, the judge’s instructions to the jury, and the evidence produced at trial. See Commonwealth v. Mello, supra; Commonwealth v. Costa, 414 Mass. 618, 629 (1993); Commonwealth v. Yesilciman, 406 Mass. 736, 746 (1990).””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“requires that the defendant have '[1] sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and ... [2] a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he prosecutor's remarks were characteristic of enthusiastic rhetoric, strong advocacy, and excusable hyperbole, and did not cross the line between fair and improper argument.”
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.