198 Md. App. 1 - Fair 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. “[T]reating the writing on the check as a verbal part of the act of issuing the check, we are persuaded that the check was merely circumstantial non-assertive crime scene evidence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 232 Md. App. 430 - Darling v. State · State v. Young

2. “It would make no sense to ask whether the money order was true. [The money order] [']is, by its nature, neither true nor false and thus cannot be offered * for its truth.' " (internal citation omitted) ). But this does not mean that Young has successfully or convincingly established his affirmative defense. The ultimate question of whether the prescription is from an authorized provider acting in the course of professional practice remains a question of fact for the jury to resolve. But offering a prescription to prove the operative fact of the prescription's existence would not have been hearsay. 6 And that is all we must decide regarding the possession charges. 7 Because the trial court erred in granting the motion in limine , we shall affirm the Court of Special Appeals and remand for a new trial on the specified possession charges, as we explain infra . But the State perseveres, pointing out that Young was also charged under CR § 5-602 for possession with intent * to distribute. It explains that, while CR § 5-601 specifically applies only to drugs not obtained by prescription, CR § 5-602 contains no such enumerated limitation. This section provides that, "except as otherwise provided”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Young

3. “Committee note to Md. Rule 5-801 departs substantially from its federal counterpart. Rather than restricting the definition of 'assertion,' the note does not attempt to define 'assertion' ....”

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