162 Md. App. 39 - Matoumba 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““We think the better view in interpreting the rule regarding opinion testimony is the more narrow one, and the view as expressed in the amended Fed.R.Evid. 701. We also agree with the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and those courts that have found that by permitting testimony based on specialized knowledge, education, or skill under rules similar to Md. Rule 5-701, parties may avoid the notice and discovery requirements of our rules and blur the distinction between the two rules. Accordingly, we will follow the approach as reflected in the 2000 amendment to Fed. R.Evid. 701 and hold that Md. Rules 5-701 and 5-702 prohibit the admission as ‘lay opinion’ of testimony based upon specialized knowledge, skill, experience, training or education.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Matoumba v. State

2. “repeatedly looked back at the police cruiser while the officers were [e]ffecting the stop”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 238 Md. App. 87 - Thornton v. State

3. “appeared to dip his right shoulder down to the floor as [the officer] approached[.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 238 Md. App. 87 - Thornton v. State