10 Md. App. 215 - Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 state decisions

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

1. “«* * * within the facts of an individual case, it is proper to consider the complexity of both the law and the facts since the more complex a case becomes, either legally or factually, the more opportunity exists for a conflict of interest. Conversely, if the law is simple and the evidence of guilt strong, the opportunity for conflict of interest may be lessened. Pressley v. State, supra. Of course, the contention may still be found to be an unsupported allegation, Pressley v. State, supra, or to have been waived at trial, Plater v. Warden, 211 Md. 629 , 126 A. 2d 574 .””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 94 Md. App. 649 - Graves v. State · 11 Md. App. 293 - Kent v. State

2. ““In Maryland, Pressley v. State indicates that to merit relief there must be prejudice which prevents the lawyer from impartially and adequately representing his client____ This Court feels the better position, in line with both Pressley and Glosser, is that there must be a showing of some prejudice but the prejudice need only be slight before relief is required. While Pressley requires a showing of prejudice, Glosser is written in terms too specific to require more than slight prejudice. Hence, the Supreme Court granted a new trial since the representation of Glosser ‘was not as effective as it might have been ...’ Thus, this Court holds that once an actual or imminently potential conflict of interest is shown, the only demonstration of prejudice that is required is that counsel was not as effective as he might have been had the conflict not existed.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 93 Md. App. 240 - Gee v. State

3. “When the risk of a conflict of interest is brought to the attention of the trial court, however, the court has the responsibility to investigate further, to advise the defendant personally, and to receive a knowing waiver if that is the expressed wish of the defendant. In the absence of waiver the court must resolve the question as it would any issue relating to the defendant’s right to counsel. “Upon the trial judge rests the duty of seeing that the trial is conducted with solicitude for the essential rights of the accused.... The trial court should protect the right of an accused to have the assistance of counsel.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pugh v. State