Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 170 Md. App. 1 - Ware v. State

170 Md. App. 1 - Ware v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Doyle v. Ohio · Michigan v. Mosley · Davis v. United States · United States v. Hale

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

  1. “The objection interrupted the [State] in mid sentence, and it was perfectly clear what would follow if the objection were not sustained. We think that the objection went not only to what was said but also to what was obviously to come. By overruling the objection, the judge demonstrated that he was permitting the [State] to continue along the same line. It was apparent that his ruling on further objection would be unfavorable to the defense. Persistent objections would only spotlight for the jury the remarks of the [State]. In the circumstances, the absence of a further objection did not constitute a waiver. See Md.Rule 4-323(c).”
    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.