Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1 Md. App. 233 - Sweeney v. State

1 Md. App. 233 - Sweeney v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
August 1999
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently August 1999

18 state decisions

801967197019801990decided

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 Scott v. State · Brown v. State · Coleman v. State · Edwardsen v. State · Hill v. State

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

  1. ““When a defendant is confronted with a motion to strike out or revoke a suspended sentence or probation for an alleged violation of the conditions or terms thereof, he should be seasonably informed of the substance of the charge against him and should be afforded an opportunity to reply to the motion either orally or in writing, if he desires to do so, but there is no requirement that he should be arraigned, or that he should plead to the charge as if the motion were an indictment, information or state warrant. If the defendant appears at such hearing without counsel, the court may, but it is not obliged to, advise the defendant of his right to obtain counsel or assign counsel to represent him. The failure of the court to do either did not deprive the defendant of his constitutional right to due process. Cf. Hill v. State, 218 Md. 120 , 145 A. 2d 445 (1958) ; Bryant v. State, 218 Md. 151 , 145 A. 2d 777 (1958).””
    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.