Commonwealth v. Shangkuan’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2265 (§ 40221 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (§ 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Crawford v. Washington · Davis v. Washington · Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts · Hopkins v. Reeves · Commonwealth v. Slavski
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T] he primary purpose for which the return of service in this case was created is to serve the routine administrative functions of the court system .... The return of service here was not created for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at a potential future criminal trial.”
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.