19 Md. App. 179 - Carroll v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently November 1999 · most notably 31 Md. App. 271 - Von Lusch v. State (1976), State v. Butler (1999)
27 state decisions
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 Gideon v. Wainwright · Gault · United States v. Tucker · Argersinger v. Hamlin · Burgett v. Texas
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We pointed out in both Johnson, supra, and Moore, supra, that the burden is on the State to establish by ‘clear and convincing evidence that the defendant’s constitutional right to counsel was not infringed at the prior proceeding.’ The procedure that we spelled out in Johnson, supra, and reiterated in Moore, supra, was not intended to be a guide, that may or may not be used, but was enunciated and promulgated for the Bench and Bar to follow.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The court shall ... conduct a hearing... At the hearing the State shall first have the burden of producing evidence of a prior conviction, unless admitted by the defendant, sufficient to justify a finding by the court that the defendant has suffered such previous conviction.... When this showing has been made the defendant must produce evidence tending to establish that his constitutional right to counsel was infringed in the prior proceeding at issue____ The burden is then upon the State to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant’s constitutional right to counsel was not infringed at the prior proceeding____”
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.