14 Md. App. 201 - Peaper v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently August 2023
19 state decisions
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 State v. Hutchinson · Dunlavey v. Commonwealth · 42 Cal. App. 385 - People v. Sing · State Ex Rel. French v. Hendricks Superior Court · 5 Md. App. 354 - Melia 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he issue has been resolved directly and explicitly that a judge is not disqualified from later participation in a case, even where the suppression of physical evidence is the key issue, by virtue of the fact that [the same judge] issued the search and seizure warrant. Waupoose v. State, 46 Wis.2d 257 , 174 N.W.2d 503, 504 (1970); Arnold v. Commonwealth, 421 S.W.2d 366, 366-67 (Ky.1967); State ex rel. French v. Hendricks Superior Court, 252 Ind. 213 , 247 N.E.2d 519, 525 (1969); State v. Smith, 113 N.J.Super. 120 , 273 A.2d 68, 78 (1971); State v. Toce, 6 Conn.Cir.Ct. 192 , 269 A.2d 421, 422-423 (1969); Irwin v. State, 441 S.W.2d 203, 208-209 (Tex.Crim.App.1968).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hoeft · Hirning v. Dooley““[AJbsent a showing of bias or prejudice, the mere fact that a judge issued the warrant would not preclude him from sitting either at a suppression hearing dealing with that warrant or at the trial upon the merits.””
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.