Guzman v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
September 2016
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Kourouvacilis v. General Motors Corp. · Wrenn v. Gould · Matthews v. Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. · Dacey v. Connecticut Bar Assn. · Hoffman v. Howmedica, Inc.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(i) those that have been granted a full pardon pursuant to section 152 of chapter 127, if the governor expressly states in writing his belief in the individual’s innocence, or “(ii) those who have been granted judicial relief by a state court of competent jurisdiction, on grounds which tend to establish the innocence of the individual as set forth in clause (vi) of subsection (C), and if (a) the judicial relief vacates or reverses the judgment of a felony conviction, and the felony indictment or complaint used to charge the individual with such felony has been dismissed, or if a new trial was ordered, the individual was not retried and the felony indictment or complaint was dismissed or a nolle prosequi was entered, or if a new trial was ordered the individual was found not guilty at the new trial; and (b) at the time of the filing of an action under this chapter no criminal proceeding is pending or can be brought against the individual by a district attorney or the attorney general for any act associated with such felony conviction” (emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““In order for an individual to prevail and recover damages against the commonwealth in a cause of action brought under [G. L. c. 258D], the individual must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that:-— “(i) he is a member of the class of persons defined in [G. L. c. 258D, § 1 (B)]; “(ii) he was convicted of an offense classified as a felony; “(iii) he did not plead guilty to the offense charged, or to any lesser included offense . . . “(iv) he was sentenced to incarceration for not less than 1 year . . . and has served all or any part of such sentence; “(v) he was incarcerated solely on the basis of the conviction for the offense that is the subject of the claim; “(vi) he did not commit the crimes or crime charged in the indictment or complaint. . . ; and “(vii) to the extent that he is guilty of conduct that would have justified a conviction of any lesser included misdemeanor ... he has served the maximum sentence he would have received for such lesser included misdemeanor and not less than one additional year in a prison.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““In order for an individual to prevail and recover damages against the [C]ommonwealth in a cause of action brought under this chapter, the individual must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that: — (i) he is a member of the class of persons defined in subsection (B); [and] . . . (vi) he did not commit the crimes or crime charged in the indictment or complaint or any other felony arising out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the indictment or complaint, or any lesser included felony . . . .””
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.