Commonwealth v. Holmes’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
111 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 111 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably Commonwealth v. Harper (1979), Commonwealth v. Davis (1980)
111 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 Ex Rel. Washington v. Maroney · Commonwealth v. Hubbard · Commonwealth v. Bosurgi · Commonwealth v. Dancer · Commonwealth v. Futch
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 111 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he essence of criminal conspiracy is a common understanding, no matter how it came into being, that a particular criminal objective be accomplished. By its very nature, the crime of conspiracy is frequently not susceptible of proof except by circumstantial evidence. And although a conspiracy cannot be based upon mere suspicion or conjecture a conspiracy may be inferentially established by showing the relationships, conduct or circumstances of the parties, and the overt acts on the part of the coconspira-tors have uniformly been held competent to prove that a corrupt confederation has in fact been formed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘[TJhose facts and circumstances available at the time of the arrest which would justify a reasonable prudent man,, in the belief that a crime has been committed and that the individual arrested was the probable perpetrator.’ ””
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.