Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 154 Md. App. 286 - Johnson v. State

154 Md. App. 286 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
August 2015
most recently cited

20 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Terry v. Ohio · Blockburger v. United States · Florida v. Royer · Ornelas v. United States

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

  1. “A Terry stop is distinguishable from an arrest in three important respects: the length of the detention, the investigative activities that occur during the detention, and the question of whether the suspect is removed from the place of the stop to another location. Farrow v. State, 68 Md. App. 519, 526 [ 514 A.2d 35 ] (1986) (citing Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 [ 103 S.Ct. 1319 , 75 L.Ed.2d 229 ] (1983)). “In determining whether an investigatory stop is in actuality an arrest requiring probable cause, courts consider the ‘totality of the circumstances.’ ” In re David S., 367 Md. [at 535, 789 A.2d 607 ] (quoting United States v. Patterson, 648 F.2d 625, 632 (9th Cir.1981)). Under the totality of circumstances, no one factor is dispositive. See Ferris v. State, 355 Md. 356, 376 [ 735 A.2d 491 ] (1999).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The use of firearms in connection with drug trafficking crimes is an everyday occurrence____ [T]he combination of dealing drugs and possessing a firearm has become too commonplace. The Use or Possession of a Firearm Component. This component recognizes that firearms readily available and that those involved in drug trafficking crimes are quite willing to use those weapons to resolve disputes with their rivals or their customers. III. Use of a Firearm in a Drug Trafficking Crime 1. Why is it necessary to establish that use or possession of a firearm be a separate offense when Article 27, § 36B, already makes it unlawful to use a handgun in the commission of a felony or crime of violence? The current statute is restricted to handguns. The proposed bill would include all firearms. Many drug dealers are using automatic weapons, assault rifles and other firearms that may not fall within the current definition of a handgun---- The language in this bill prohibits anyone to “use or possess” a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime. It would affect an individual who carries a handgun while dealing drugs, even though he does not use it.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “"The General Assembly of Maryland hereby finds and declares that: (i) There has, in recent years, been an alarming increase in the number of violent crimes perpetrated in Maryland, and a high percentage of those crimes involve the use of handguns; (ii) The result has been a substantial increase in the number of persons killed or injured which is traceable, in large part, to the carrying of handguns on the streets an d public ways by persons inclined to u se them in criminal activity; (iii) The laws currently in force have not been effective in curbing the more frequent use of handguns in perpetrating crime; and (iv) Further regulations on the wearing, carrying, and transporting of handguns are necessary to preserve the peace and tranquility of the State and to protect the rights and liberties of its citizens.””
    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.