55 Va. App. 647 - Ray v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
March 2017
most recently cited
16 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Puckett v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Neder v. United States · Hedgpeth v. Pulido · Rivera v. Illinois
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]e can determine prejudice only upon “proper proffer showing what the testimony would have been.” Holles v. Sunrise Terrace, Inc., 257 Va. 131, 135 , 509 S.E.2d 494, 497 (1999); Molina, 47 Va.App. at 368 , 624 S.E.2d at 97 (citations omitted). Even when “we are not totally in the dark concerning the nature of the evidence,” we still must “know enough about the specifics” to be able to “say with assurance” that the lower court committed prejudicial error. Smith v. Hylton, 14 Va.App. 354, 358 , 416 S.E.2d 712, 715 (1992).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Absent a proffer showing harm was done, we are forbidden to consider the question----This is because a proffer allows us to examine both the admissibility of the proposed testimony, and whether, even if admissible, its exclusion prejudiced the proffering party.... We can perform this examination only when the proponent proffers the testimony he expected to elicit, rather than merely his theory of the case.”
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.