Muhammad v. Com.’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Porter v. Com. (2008), Jay v. Com. (2008)
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 59 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Almendarez-Torres v. United States · Faretta v. California · Brady v. United States
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A principal in the first degree is the actual perpetrator of the crime. A principal in the second degree, or an aider or abettor as he is sometimes termed, is one who is present, actually or constructively, assisting the perpetrator in the commission of the crime. In order to make a person a principal in the second degree actual participation in the commission of the crime is not necessary. The test is whether or not he was encouraging, inciting, or in some manner offering aid in the commission of the crime. If he was present lending countenance, or otherwise aiding while another did the act, he is an aider and abettor or principal in the second degree.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]hile no single piece of evidence may be sufficient, the `combined force of many concurrent and related circumstances, each insufficient in itself, may lead a reasonable mind irresistibly to a conclusion.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“insure complete symmetry among all death penalty cases.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Teleguz v. Com. · Juniper v. Com.
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.