Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 MASSAPPCT 439 - Commonwealth v. Sueiras

Commonwealth v. Sueiras’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
January 2018
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Katz v. United States · Commonwealth v. Grace · Commonwealth v. Forde · Commonwealth v. Stewart · Donovan v. Fitzsimmons

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

  1. “Nonetheless, a witness may not rely on a bald assertion of his privilege if the circumstances do not clearly indicate a possibility of self-incrimination.... A witness must show a real risk that his answers to questions will tend to indicate his involvement in illegal activity, and not a mere imaginary, remote or speculative possibility of prosecution.... A witness also is not entitled to make a blanket assertion of the privilege. The privilege must be asserted with respect to particular questions, and the possible incriminatory potential of each proposed question, or area which the prosecution might wish to explore, must be considered.”
    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.