Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 124 Md. App. 331 - Casey v. State

124 Md. App. 331 - Casey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 2018

12 state decisions

80199920002010decided

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 Gelbard v. United States · United States v. Blue · 93 Md. App. 168 - Fraidin v. Weitzman · Harrison v. State · Crawford 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The credibility of the accused was all important in the determination by the jury of the validity of her claim throughout the interrogations that she killed in self-defense. There is no doubt that the challenged comments of the police which were heard by the jury, whether in the form of questions, assertions of disbelief, opinions (not as expert witnesses), argument, recounting of what others were purported to have said contrary to the version of the accused, hearsay, or otherwise, tended to seriously prejudice the defense. We think that they did so improperly in the circumstances. Defense counsel made abundantly clear, time and time again, that he objected to the procedure under which the challenged matters went before the jury and to the substance of those matters.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Procedurally, we think [the trial judge] erred in not conducting a preliminary inquiry out of the presence of the jury and hearing testimony of all the surrounding facts and circumstances to determine initially whether a confidential relationship existed between Harrison and [the lawyer-witness], and if so, whether or not there had been a waiver of the privilege.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “well settled that the investigating officers' opinions on the truthfulness of an accused's statements are inadmissible under Maryland Rule 5-401,”
    1 later decision 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.