Maloney v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Our standard for appellate review of rulings on pretrial motions to suppress evidence remains unchanged despite the recent repeal of RCr 9.78 and its reformulation under RCr 8.27. Simpson v. Commonwealth , 474 S.W.3d 544 , 546-47 (Ky. 2015). We apply the same two-step process adopted in Adcock v. Commonwealth , 967 S.W.2d 6 , 8 (Ky. 1998). First, we review the trial court's findings of fact, which are deemed to be conclusive, if they are supported by substantial evidence. Next, we review de novo the trial court's application of the law to the facts to determine whether its decision is correct as a matter of law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Applegate v. Commonwealth

2. “a place to which the public or a substantial group of persons has access and includes but is not limited to highways, transportation facilities, schools, places of amusements, parks, places of business, playgrounds, and hallways, lobbies, and other portions of apartment houses and hotels not constituting rooms or apartments designed for actual residence. An act is deemed to occur in a public place if it produces its offensive or proscribed consequences in a public place.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hartman v. Thompson

3. “gate [ ]or any other restriction [would] indicate that the [porch] was an exclusively private area”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Lohse