152 Md. App. 442 - Pitt v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
4
states following
July 2014
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The reason for the State’s repudiation of the agreement is immaterial with respect to the admissibility of the statement. Whether its reason be sound or unsound, technical or substantial, in good faith or simply because the prosecutor had misgivings or a change of heart, or was utterly arbitrary, is of no matter. The justification vel non of the rescission, repudiation, or breach of the agreement by the State goes to whether the defendant is entitled to have the agreement enforced; it does not affect the admissibility of the statement obtained under it. This is in accord with the rationale of Wright.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wills · State v. Pitt““(a) Conditions for Agreement. “(1) Terms. The defendant may enter into an agreement with the State’s Attorney for a plea of guilty or nolo contendere on any proper condition, including one or more of the following: “(A) That the State’s Attorney will amend the charging document to charge a specified offense or add a specified offense, or will file a new charging document; “(B) That the State’s Attorney will enter a nolle prosequi pursuant to Rule 4-247(a) or move to mark certain charges against the defendant stet on the docket pursuant to Rule 4-248(a); “(C) That the State’s Attorney will agree to the entry of a judgment of acquittal on certain charges pending against the defendant; “(D) That the State will not charge the defendant with the commission of certain other offenses; “(E) That the State’s Attorney will recommend, not oppose, or make no comment to the court with respect to a particular sentence, disposition, or other judicial action; “(F) That the parties will submit a plea agreement proposing a particular sentence, disposition, or other judicial action to a judge for consideration pursuant to section (c) of this Rule.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Pitt“Unauthorized control over property (a) A person may not willfully or knowingly obtain or exert unauthorized control over property, if the person: (1) intends to deprive the owner of the property; (2) willfully or knowingly uses, conceals, or abandons the property in a manner that deprives the owner of the property; or (3) uses, conceals, or abandons the property knowing the use, concealment, or abandonment probably will deprive the owner of the property. Unauthorized control over property — By deception (b) A person may not obtain control over property by willfully or knowingly using deception, if the person: (1) intends to deprive the owner of the property; (2) willfully or knowingly uses, conceals, or abandons the property in a manner that deprives the owner of the property; or (3) uses, conceals, or abandons the property knowing the use, concealment, or abandonment probably will deprive the owner of the property.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Allen
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.