Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 9 Va. App. 298 - Bruce v. Commonwealth

9 Va. App. 298 - Bruce v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
April 2017
most recently cited

38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably 12 Va. App. 1003 - Lavinder v. Commonwealth (1991), 39 Va. App. 576 - Mouberry v. Commonwealth (2003)

38 state decisions

180199020002010decided

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 Padilla-Martinez v. United States · Stokes v. Warden, Powhatan Correctional Center · 2 Va. App. 342 - Duncan v. Commonwealth · 2 Va. App. 497 - Cooper v. Commonwealth · Vines v. Muncy

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

  1. “A “sawed-off’ shotgun is any weapon, loaded or unloaded, originally designated as a shoulder weapon, utilizing a self-contained cartridge from which a number of ball shot pellets or projectiles may be fired simultaneously from a smooth or rifle bore by a single function of the firing device and which has a barrel length of less than eighteen (18) inches for smooth bore weapons and sixteen (16) inches for rifled weapons. A weapon of less than .225 caliber is not a sawed-off shotgun.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “which incorrectly states the applicable law or which would be confusing or misleading to the jury.”
    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.