Commonwealth v. McQuaid’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably In Re Commitment of Hutchinson (1982), Commonwealth v. Hailey (1977)
40 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 Barker v. Wingo · Robinson v. State of California · Klopfer v. State of North Carolina · United States v. Ewell · O'Connor v. Donaldson
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 7403. Hearing and determination of incompetency to proceed; stay of proceedings; dismissal of charges. (a) Competency Determination and Burden of Proof.— The moving party shall have the burden of establishing incompetency to proceed by clear and convincing evidence. The determination shall be made by the court. (b) Effect as Stay — Exception.—A determination of incompetency to proceed shall effect a stay of the prosecution for so long as such incapacity persists, excepting that any legal objections suitable for determination prior to trial and without the personal participation of the person charged may be raised and decided in the interim. (c) Defendant’s Right to Counsel; Reexamination. — A person who is determined to be incompetent to proceed shall have a continuing right to counsel so long as the criminal charges are pending. Following such determination, the person charged shall be reexamined not less than every 90 days by a psychiatrist appointed by the court and a report of reexamination shall be submitted to the court and to counsel. (d) Effect on Criminal Detention. — Whenever a person who has been charged with a crime has been determined to be incompetent to proceed, he shall not for that reason alone be denied pretrial release. Nor shall he in any event be detained on the criminal charge longer than the reasonable period of time necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that he will attain that capacity in the foreseeable future. If the co”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““We hold . . . that a defendant may be committed under section 408 ‘. . . only for a reasonable period of time necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that he will attain that capacity in the foreseeable future.’ Jackson v. Indiana, supra, 406 U.S. at 738 , 92 S.Ct. at 1858 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the length of the delay, the reason for the delay, the defendant's assertion of his right, and prejudice to the defendant”
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.