Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 14 Md. App. 721 - Johnson v. State

14 Md. App. 721 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
8
states following
April 2017
most recently cited

2 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably 24 Md. App. 128 - Andresen v. State (1975), State v. Rose (1975)

2 district · 40 state decisions

28019721980199020002010decided

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 Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · United States v. Ventresca · United States v. Harris · 3 Md. App. 38 - Frey 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““There is no statute in this State providing that the facts in the application, set forth to establish probable cause, must result from observations made within a designated time before the issuance of the warrant. Nor do we find any cases which lay down a rigid rule. However, the remoteness of the facts observed from the date of the issuance of the warrant is an element to be considered in each instance by the issuing authority in determining whether it appears that there was probable cause. Clayton v. State, 1 Md. App. 500, 503 . The issue, therefore, is whether this lapse of 26 days between the observation of the facts and the issuance of the warrant, was so remote, when considered in the circumstances of this case, so as to invalidate the search warrant. Clayton v. State, supra, at 504. See Varon, supra, at 322; 100 A.L.R.2d 525 .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.