Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 MDAPP 45 - Albrecht v. State

Albrecht v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
3
states following
March 2022
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently March 2022

23 state decisions

1001995200020102020decided

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 Burks v. United States · Greene v. Massey · State v. Albrecht · Adams v. State of Maryland · Ford 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Generally speaking, amendments that have been deemed to be merely changes of form have been such things as a clerical correction with respect to the name of a defendant, the substitution of one name for another as a robbery victim, a change in the description of money, changing the name of the owner of property in a theft case, and changing the date of the offense. An amendment as to substance, by contrast, would change the very character of the offense charged.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “On motion of a party or on its own initiative, the court at any time before verdict may permit a charging document to be amended except that if the amendment changes the character of the offense charged, the consent of the parties is required. If amendment of a charging document reasonably so requires, the court shall grant the defendant an extension of time or continuance.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(1) that the defendant is engaged in conduct that created a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another; (2) that a reasonable person would not have engaged in that conduct, and that the defendant acted recklessly.”
    2 later decisions 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.