140 Md. App. 495 - Southern v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The first to testify was Officer Richard Pippin of the Prince George’s County Police. He testified that on February 19th, 2000, he responded to a call regarding a robbery at a 7-11 on Old Branch Avenue. When he arrived, he spoke to a Carolyn Pryor, and approximately 15 minutes later drove her and one other individual several blocks away to Wolverton Avenue. He told her that the police had apprehended a suspect fitting the description of the person who had robbed the 7-11.... “The next witness called by the prosecutor was Corporal Charles Burgess. He stated that he had responded to the report of the robbery and had been involved in the apprehension of a suspect, together with a K-9 officer.... “Officer Monty Burkhalter ... testified that Corporal Burgess had handed over the Petitioner to him after he was apprehended.... Burkhalter stated that at the time the Petitioner was turned over to him, he had already been arrested and was in handcuffs. “The State’s next witness on the identification was Carolyn Pryor. She stated that she had been a customer in the 7-11 on the morning of the robbery, and as she was approaching the cashier, a man came in the door with dark red T-shirt or bandanna covering the lower part of his face. He jumped over the counter and began kicking the cash register, and while he was doing this the bandanna or T-shirt kept falling down. She described this person to the police after the incident, and they took her to another location to see if she could identi”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Southern v. State

2. ““(a) Generally. As to each party to an appeal, the Court shall dispose of an appeal in one of the following ways: (1) dismiss the appeal pursuant to Rule 8-602; (2) affirm the judgment; (3) vacate or reverse the judgment; (4) modify the judgment; (5) remand the action to a lower court in accordance with section (d) of this Rule; or (6) an appropriate combination of the above. (d) Remand. (1) Generally. If the Court concludes that the substantial merits of a case will not be determined by affirming, reversing or modifying the judgment, or that justice will be served by permitting further proceedings, the Court may remand that case to a lower court. In the order remanding a case, the appellate court shall state the purpose for the remand. The order of remand and the opinion upon which the order is based are conclusive as to the points decided. Upon remand, the lower court shall conduct any further proceedings necessary to determine the action in accordance with the opinion and order of the appellate court.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Southern v. State

3. ““Defense counsel’s statement that she sought to ‘suppress the stop’ should have put up a red flag for the State, and should have alerted the State that it was necessary to provide evidence concerning the initial stop. Appellant is not required to present evidence concerning the propriety of the initial stop. Once a defendant properly challenges the propriety of the stop, the burden is on the State to present evidence justifying its actions. See, e.g., DiPasquale v. State, 43 Md.App. 574, 578 , 406 A.2d 665 (1979) (‘Warrant-less Fourth Amendment intrusions are presumptively unreasonable ...' and the burden is allocated to the State of showing adequate justification for the exceptional departure from the Fourth Amendment norm’). We hold that appellant did not waive his Fourth Amendment challenge by failing to present evidence concerning the initial stop.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Southern v. State