Commonwealth v. Sokphann Chhim’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 17 state decisions

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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A trial judge has the authority, pursuant to rule 25 (b) (2), to reduce a verdict, despite the presence of sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict.... Although the purpose of the power to reduce a verdict is to ensure that the result in every case is consonant with justice, . . . the power is to be used sparingly, . . . and the judge is not to sit as a second jury. ... A most important consideration is whether the jury verdict is markedly inconsistent with verdicts returned in similar cases.... Our role is not to decide whether we would have acted as the trial judge did. The judge has the advantage of face to face evaluation of the witnesses and the evidence at trial and is therefore in a far better position than we[ ] to make the judgment required by [rule 25 (b) (2)]. . . . We decide only whether the judge abused his discretion or committed other error of law. . . . “A judge’s discretion to reduce a verdict pursuant to rule 25 (b) (2) is appropriately exercised where the weight of the evidence in the case, although technically sufficient to support the jury’s verdict, points to a lesser crime. Thus, for example, where evidence of premeditation was slim, the judge did not abuse his discretion in reducing a verdict of murder in the first degree to murder in the second degree.... Similarly, where the weight of the evidence suggests that the defendant did not act with malice, a murder verdict may be reduced to manslaughter. . . . We must examine, therefore, whether t”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Grassie · Commonwealth v. Pagan

2. “If a verdict of guilty is returned, the judge may on motion set aside the verdict and order a new trial, or order the entry of a finding of not guilty, or order the entry of a finding of guilty of any offense included in the offense charged in the indictment or complaint.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Grassie

3. “determine whether the evidence, in its light most favorable to the Commonwealth, notwithstanding the contrary evidence presented by the defendant, is sufficient ... to permit the jury to infer the existence of the essential elements of the crime charged.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 93 Mass. App. Ct. 1106 - Commonwealth v. Decarvalho