Foster v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably Gall v. Parker (2000), Thomas Clyde Bowling, Jr. v. Phillip Parker, Warden (2003)
5 federal appellate · 47 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 Chapman v. State of California · Bruton v. United States · Irvin v. Dowd · United States v. Jacobsen · Richardson v. Marsh
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Since the adoption of the penal code, we have undertaken to set out what evidence is required to support an instruction on extreme emotional disturbance. We have explained in prior opinions that the event which triggers the explosion of violence on the part of the criminal defendant must be sudden and uninterrupted. It is not a mental disease or illness. It is also not equivalent to duress as [a defendant] urges us to believe. Thus, it is wholly insufficient for the accused defendant to claim the defense of extreme emotional disturbance based on a gradual victimization from his or her environment, unless the additional proof of a triggering event is sufficiently shown. (Citations omitted.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is not the amount of publicity which determines that venue should be changed; it is whether public opinion is so aroused as to preclude a fair trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The evidence presented did not support an instruction on wanton murder. Wanton murder is not a lesser-included offense of intentional murder. It is simply murder committed with a different state of mental culpability .... It is not proper to instruct the jury on a wanton offense when all the evidence indicates that it would be unreasonable for the jury to believe that the defendant’s conduct was anything other than intentional. The evidence does not indicate wanton conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.