141 Md. App. 292 - Pringle v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[Witness]: My opinion is that the drugs that were here were going to be distributed in some form or fashion, either to regain money or to be used for sex. [Prosecutor]: And how is it you come to that opinion, officer? [Witness]: Based on the statement that I have before me and the fact that, I mean, we have got five baggies and they are packaged individually, which is the way they are usually packaged for resale, generally twenty dollar bags.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 219 Md. App. 137 - Barkley v. State

2. “Contrary to appellant’s contentions, Detective Massoni did not explicitly or implicitly testify that appellant intended to distribute drugs. Rather, Detective Massoni’s opinion related to the quantity and packaging of the drugs that were contained in five zip lock baggies each containing similar amounts of cocaine.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 219 Md. App. 137 - Barkley v. State

3. “[D]o you have an opinion, based upon that expertise, within a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, as to whether the defendant intended to distribute the cocaine that is enclosed in those five zip lock baggies?”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 219 Md. App. 137 - Barkley v. State