2 Md. App. 571 - Gaylord v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently May 1999
14 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 Royal v. State · Lane v. State · Midgett v. State · Hays and Wainwright v. State · Hewitt 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It may he argued the lower court was perhaps overzealous in protecting the rights of the witnesses, Shackleford and Norris, but it must be remembered that they were both infants and were entitled to be informed that their testimony could seriously tend to incriminate them.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a defendant in a criminal prosecution cannot raise for the first time on appeal an objection which was available to him at the trial and which he did not raise below”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Conyers v. State“the court will not ordinarily decide any point or question which does not plainly appear by the record to have been tried and decided by the lower court”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Conyers v. State
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.