Commonwealth v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 50 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Accordingly, as one of the elements of a charge under G. L. c. 269, § 10 ( m ), the Commonwealth must prove that a defendant either knew a firearm or feeding device he or she possessed qualifies as having a large capacity under the statute or knew that the firearm or feeding device is capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition. Here, the judge instructed the jury on the elements they were required to find in order to convict the defendant of unlawful possession of large capacity weapons and feeding devices as follows:”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Cassidy · 93 Mass. App. Ct. 740 - Commonwealth v. Galarza

2. “[n]onetheless, we have not endorsed 'giving the police carte blanche to search without a warrant any time subsequent to a valid stop' "). The Commonwealth contends that the officers' search of the glove compartment was permissible in order to search for (unspecified) evidence of separate crimes: operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of marijuana, and "based on the discovery of the loaded Smith and Wesson .380 and three bags of marijuana [found] during the inventory at the scene.”

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

3. “The issue of paramount importance is whether the police, prior to the commencement of a warrantless search, had probable cause to believe that they would find the instrumentality of a crime or evidence pertaining to a crime in the vehicle”

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