Commonwealth v. Ahmad’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 21 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “of minimal relevance [if] it [does] not point toward any particular third party who might have committed the crime”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 100 Mass. App. Ct. 172 - COMMONWEALTH v. RICKY SIN. · 94 Mass. App. Ct. 1121 - Commonwealth v. Reyes

2. “As a general principle ... “[fjoundation-a! facts conditioning the application of technical exclusionary rules,” including the hearsay rule, are reserved to the judge; conversely, “[fjoundational facts conditioning the logical relevance of the evidence” are submitted to the jury, at least where there is sufficient evidence to support a jury determination that the condition has been fulfilled.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Grandoe Corp. v. Gander Mountain Co.