16 Md. App. 656 - Soles v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

43 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “To thwart in-court identification, the appellant attempted a bold gambit less out of the Wade-Gilbert-Stovall trilogy than out of Dumas’s Corsican Brothers or Dickens’s Tale of Two Cities. He proposed that he be placed among the spectators in the courtroom and that prosecution witnesses be required to pick him out from the crowd. ' Judge Powers denied the motion, noting, as did the State, that a person, apparently the appellant’s brother, was seated in that courtroom who was a “dead ringer” for the appellant. Judge Powers observed that he would be unable to tell the one from the other, were one to take the other’s place at the trial table.... To substitute a “dead ringer” — or, as Judge Powers put it, a “look alike” produced “by a clever Hollywood make-up man” — would be to perpetuate a fraud upon the court. Our predilections notwithstanding, it is not to exonerate Charles Darnay to insinuate Sidney Carton into the dock in his stead. It was certainly no abuse of the broad discretion described by Alston v. State, 11 Md.App. 624 , 629 — 630[, 276 A.2d 225 (1971)], and Cummings v. State, 7 Md.App. 687, 691 [, 256 A.2d 894 (1969)], to deny the appellant’s request under the exotic circumstances of its being made here.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sullivan v. State

2. “contrary to his duty” and is therefore (1) incapable of being bribed by the arrestee and (2) an appropriate subject for”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 63 Md. App. 324 - Richardson v. State