Commonwealth v. Robinson, R.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “carefully considered language of the Supreme Court, even if technically dictum, generally must be treated as authoritative”
• “Material that can fairly be described as ‘surplus’ may only be stricken [from an indictment] if it irrelevant and prejudicial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).