Commonwealth v. Gordon’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
22 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 16 · 18 U.S.C. § 3559 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229B (§ 240a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Padilla v. Kentucky · Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen · Commonwealth v. Saferian · Commonwealth v. Satterfield · MARIN
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Indeed, [ Mass. R. Crim. P. 30 (c) (3), as appearing in 435 Mass. 1501 (2001),] encourages the denial of a motion for a new trial on the papers, without hearing, where no substantial issue is raised.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A strong policy of finality limits the grant of new trial motions to exceptional situations, and such motions should not be allowed lightly.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“as the affidavits leave too many factual questions unanswered”
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.