Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 185 Md. 481 - Jones v. State

Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
3
states following
September 2011
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 1 district · 58 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably Dashiell v. Meeks (2006), Day v. State (1950)

3 federal appellate · 1 district · 58 state decisions

23019461950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Lee v. State · Markley v. State · Parker v. State · Gray v. State

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

  1. ““When, therefore, a suggestion that a party cannot have a fair and impartial trial, supported by affidavit, is filed in a court where a case is pending, it is the duty of the court to order a removal of the record to some ju risdiction where the jury will not be prejudiced. If it appears doubtful that the juries in a given circuit would be fair and impartial, the case should be removed to some other circuit or some other section of the State. Without rehearsing the allegations contained in the petition of the accused for a change of venue, it is sufficient to say it contains averments which, not being contradicted by the State, must be taken as true, and cast a grave doubt upon the question of whether the accused could have obtained a fair trial before a jury in Wicomico County.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““if exercised in a harsh, unjust, capricious and arbitrary way.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.