Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 937 SW2D 703 - Hedges v. Commonwealth

Hedges v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2016

8 state decisions

30199620002010decided

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 Commonwealth v. Benham · Commonwealth v. Sawhill · Trowel v. Commonwealth · Campbell v. Commonwealth · Tribbett v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “On motion for directed verdict, the trial court must draw all fair and reasonable inferences from the evidence in favor of the Commonwealth. If the evidence is sufficient to induce a reasonable juror to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, a, directed verdict should not be given. For the purpose of ruling on the motion, the trial court must assume that the evidence for the Commonwealth is true, but reserving to the jury questions as to the credibility and weight to be given ,to such testimony. On appellate review,' the test of a directed verdict is, if under the evidence as a whole, it would be clearly unreasonable for a jury to find guilt, only then the defendant is entitled to a directed verdict of acquittal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[E]ven if the defendant did enter the apartment with the intent to commit a crime, the burglary statute further requires that the defendant either knowingly entered or unlawfully remained in the apartment, and that he then committed an independent crime satisfying the elements of the burglary offense, after his permission to be on the property had been withdrawn. Since no evidence was cited to show that the defendant knew his permission to be in the apartment had been withdrawn at the time he destroyed the property, he was entitled to a directed verdict.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “To prevent any misunderstanding, it is important to say what this case does not hold. We do not hold or suggest that if one is lawfully admitted to the premises of another, he thereafter has carte blanche to engage in criminal conduct. Not at all. If a lawfully admitted person commits assault, or theft, or any other crimes, he may be prosecuted for those crimes.”
    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.