Commonwealth v. McComb’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 100 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently November 1999 · most notably Commonwealth v. O'SEARO (1976), Commonwealth v. Ohle (1983)
2 federal appellate · 100 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 Commonwealth v. Clair · Commonwealth v. Rose · Commonwealth v. Wrona · Commonwealth v. Johnston · Commonwealth v. Stafford
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . the trial court is not required to accept the language of the point submitted by counsel but rather is free to select its own form of expression. The only issue is whether the area is adequately, accurately and clearly presented to the jury for their consideration.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(1) The slayer must have been free from fault in provoking or continuing the difficulty which resulted in the killing . . (2) The slayer must have reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death, great bodily harm, or some felony, and that there was a necessity to kill in order to save himself therefrom . . . . (3) The slayer must not have violated any duty to retreat or avoid the danger . .” (citations omitted).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In Commonwealth v. McComb, supra , this Court stated: To determine the reasonableness of the use of a deadly force, the opportunity to retreat, the role of the accused in provoking or escalating the difficulty, the trier of fact is required, not only to evaluate the conduct of the appellant during the final confrontation but also to view it in light of those circumstances that preceded and precipitated that final confrontation. [Citations omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.