Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 140 Md. App. 607 - Bey v. State

140 Md. App. 607 - Bey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently April 2021

19 state decisions

120200120102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 593 · 18 U.S.C. § 595

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Colorado v. Connelly · McNabb v. United States · Mallory v. United States · Washington Homes, Inc. v. Interstate Land Development Co.

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

  1. “Robinson, 348 Md. at 120 , 702 A.2d 741 (citing Edward J. Imwinkelried, Evidentiary Foundations 241 (3rd ed.1995)). In regard to the latter category, Maryland recognizes that law enforcement officials often have specialized training and experience to justify permitting them to offer testimony in the form of a lay opinion. Bey, 140 Md.App. at 624 , 781 A.2d 952 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness’s testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (1) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (2) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’s testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Bey, 140 Md.App. at 623 , 781 A.2d 952 (citing Rosenberg v. State, 129 Md.App. 221, 254 , 741 A.2d 533 (1999), cert. denied, 358 Md. 382 , 749 A.2d 173 (2000)). Permissible lay opinion testimony generally falls into one of two categories. The first category is”
    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.