12 Md. App. 264 - McDuffie v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““There was a time in the history of the English criminal law when great crimes were left unpunished because of harmless, technical errors. This greater strictness was perhaps due to the fact that at that period the Criminal Code was especially bloody. Capital punishment was inflicted for very trifling offenses; and, it may be, the judges sought to ameliorate its rigor by holding the crown to the observance of the nicest technicalities. * * * With the advancement of judicial science, and a more enlightened administration of the law, mere technicalities are less regarded, where they work no harm to a defendant.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 36 Md. App. 502 - Cross v. State

2. ““In each case, there was a verdict finding guilt for the consummated crime of armed robbery and also for the attempt to commit that crime. In neither case did we permit ourselves to be boxed into the logical absurdity of holding that the fact-finder had somehow concluded, beyond a reasonable doubt, both that the defendant had completed the crime and also that he had failed to complete the crime. In each case, recognizing the error for what it was, we simply reversed the judgment of guilt as to the count charging the attempt.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 25 Md. App. 148 - Lightfoot v. State

3. “In Boone v. State, 2 Md.App. 80, 114-115 [ 233 A.2d 476 ], this Court took the position that a necessary element in the crime of attempt is the failure to consummate the greater crime which was being aimed at. See also Tender v. State, 2 Md.App. 692, 698-699 [ 237 A.2d 65 ]; Price v. State, 3 Md.App. 155, 159-160 [ 238 A.2d 275 ]. Under the holding of those cases, a conviction for attempt would be inconsistent mth a conviction for the consummated crime.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Lakeysha P.