172 Md. App. 588 - Baby v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “[BABY’S COUNSEL]: ... To me, the clear answer, the unequivocal answer to this questions is no. Why? Because they ask, “If a female consents to sex initially and, during the course of the sex act to which she consented—” That means that the woman consented to the penetration. She consented to the penis going into her vagina. The State argued that any slight intrusion into the vagina is rape. Here, this woman in the note consented to sex and allowed a penis to go into her vagina. This is during the sex act. During the sex act, the man ejaculates, but the penis is inside of her when you read the note. To me, the clear answer to this question is no because she consented to the male penetration. It is in her by consent. THE COURT: Let me say this. That is what you are assuming this note means, but I don’t know that that is what it means. That is the problem. [BABY’S COUNSEL]: Well, it says— [ASSISTANT STATE’S ATTORNEY]: No. [BABY’S COUNSEL]:—she consents to sex initially— THE COURT: What does that mean? [BABY’S COUNSEL]:—and during the course of the sex act, she changes her mind, which means she is having sex— THE COURT: That is what you think it means, but I don’t know that that is what it means— [ASSISTANT STATE’S ATTORNEY]: Right. THE COURT:—that is the problem. I am going to have to, I think, respond that I am unable to answer their question as posed and that they should reread the instructions as to— [ASSISTANT STATE’S ATTORNEY]: The elements, read the instructions. THE COURT”

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

2. “it was the act of penetration that was the essence of the crime of rape; after this initial infringement upon the responsible male’s interest in a woman’s sexual and reproductive functions, any further injury was considered to be less consequential. The damage—viewed from the perspective of the husband’s or father’s interest in the reproductive functions of the victim—was done. It was this view that the moment of penetration was the point in time, after which a woman could never be “re-flowered,” that gave rise to the principle that, if a woman consents prior to penetration and withdraws consent following penetration, there is no rape. Maryland adheres to this tenet, having adopted the common law, which remains the law of the Land until and unless changed by the State’s highest court or by statute.”

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

3. “1. Did the trial court err by denying Respondent’s motion in limine to exclude, and his objection to, the testimony of Ann Burgess, who was offered by the State as an expert witness on “rape trauma syndrome” and related matters? 2. Did the trial court err by refusing to remove a juror from the jury at the point when the juror admitted having read a newspaper article about Respondent’s case?[ 10 ]”

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