157 Md. App. 82 - Wilson v. Simms’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “mandates that when an individual is in custody before trial and is subsequently convicted on the charge for which he or she was held, the time spent in custody prior to the imposition of sentence must be credited against the sentence imposed. The intent of the statute is to insure that a defendant receives as much credit as possible for time spent in custody, consistent with constitutional and practical considerations.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 180 Md. App. 440 - Stevenson v. State

2. ““[T]he Carroll County sentencing court clearly and unambiguously made the sentence consecutive to the Talbot County sentence, which was clearly and unambiguously consecutive to the sentence being served in Delaware. Consequently, the Carroll County sentence clearly and unambiguously was consecutive to the sentence being served in Delaware.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 196 Md. App. 477 - Butcher v. State

3. “Under Maryland law, an ambiguity in penal statutes is to be construed against the State. Maryland House of Correction, 348 Md. [245,] 267, 703 A.2d 167 [ (1997) ]. Similarly, if doubt exists as to the proper penalty, punishment must be construed to favor a milder penalty. Robinson, 317 Md. at 380 , 564 A.2d 395 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 160 Md. App. 180 - Dutton v. State