47 Va. App. 266 - Gilbert v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
July 2008
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Barr v. Town & Country Properties, Inc. · Hubbard v. Henrico Ltd. Partnership · Anderson v. Commonwealth · Muhammad v. Com. · Shackleford v. Commonwealth
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[w]e review questions of law, and mixed questions of law and fact, utilizing a de novo standard of review.” Muhammad v. Commonwealth, 269 Va. 451, 479 , 611 S.E.2d 537, 553 (2005). In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction, “we determine whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, the Commonwealth, and the reasonable inferences fairly deducible from that evidence support each and every element of the charged offense.” Haskins v. Commonwealth, 31 Va.App. 145, 149-50 , 521 S.E.2d 777, 779 (1999). We will affirm the conviction “unless it is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.” Shackleford v. Commonwealth, 262 Va. 196, 209 , 547 S.E.2d 899, 906 (2001).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.