Commonwealth v. Washington’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Where a Ciampa instruction is warranted, the following rules apply. A prosecutor may generally bring out on direct examination the fact that a witness has entered into a plea agreement and understands his obligations under it, but any attempts to bolster the witness by questions concerning his obligation to tell the truth should await redirect examination, and are appropriate only after the defendant has attempted to impeach the witness’s credibility by showing the witness struck a deal with the prosecution to obtain favorable treatment. Commonwealth v. Ciampa, [ 406 Mass. at 264 ]. A prosecutor in closing argument may then restate the witness’s agreement, but commits reversible error if she ‘suggests that the government has special knowledge by which it can verify the witness’s testimony.’ Id. at 265 . To guard against an implied representation of credibility, the judge must ‘specifically and forcefully tell the jury to study the witness’s credibility with particular care.’ Id. at 266 , citing United States v. Mealy, 851 F.2d 890, 900 (7th Cir. 1988). Where the jury are aware of the witness’s promise to tell the truth, the judge also should warn the jury that the government does not know whether the witness is telling the truth.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Meas · Commonwealth v. Webb