57 Va. App. 355 - Collins 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. “(1) Appellant had a legal justification or excuse for his actions because he was acting as a bail bondsman or bail enforcement agent licensed in North Car olina pursuant to his common law right to recover a principal who violated a bail contract, which right was not expressly abrogated by Virginia statute, and he had contacted local law enforcement before proceeding to secure the fugitive and was given express or implied permission; (2) The state appellate courts denied Appellant’s right to due process by retroactively applying Virginia statutory licensing requirements on bail bondsmen to limit his common law rights; (3) Appellant’s counsel was ineffective in failing to argue that the retroactive application of the licensing requirements violated his due process rights; (4) Appellant’s conviction violated due process because he lacked the requisite intent to commit abduction; and (5) Appellant’s counsel was ineffective in failing to argue that Appellant lacked the specific intent to commit abduction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Clifton Collins v. Harold Clarke