Commonwealth v. Hamilton

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• vacating a conviction where indictment failed to charge “that the exposure took place under such circumstances that the members of the public might have witnessed it” because the “exposure may have taken place where the public may not have observed it”
• vacating a conviction where indictment failed to charge \that the exposure took place under such circumstances that the members of the public might have witnessed it\ because the \exposure may have taken place where the public may not have observed it\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. Roberto Flores-Rodriguez
  Second Circuit· 1956-10-01· cited 59×
• Messina v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1957-04-05· cited 42×
• Noblett v. Commonwealth
  Supreme Court of Virginia· 1952-09-10· cited 35×
• Dill v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1975-02-21· cited 19×
• Wisneski v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2007-04-18· cited 14×
• Case v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1950-06-23· cited 14×
• Case v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)· 1950-06-23· cited 11×
• Hines v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1959-10-02