Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 201 Md. 25 - Driver v. State

Driver v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

75
cited by 75 later decisions
10
states following
September 1997
most recently cited

2 district · 73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently September 1997 · most notably Bartholomey v. State (1972), Ball v. State (1997)

2 district · 73 state decisions — followed in 10 states

3502001decided

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 Williams v. People of State of New York · Watts v. Indiana · Turner v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania · Harris v. State of South Carolina · Murphy 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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he procedure in the sentencing process is not the same as that in the trial process. It is a fundamental principle that a person accused of crime shall not be convicted unless he is given reasonable notice of the charge and an opportunity to be heard in his defense and to examine adverse witnesses. But the sentencing judge may consider information, even though obtained outside the courtroom, from persons whom the defendant has not been permitted to confront or cross-examine. Murphy v. State, 184 Md. 70 , 40 A.2d 239 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]o aid the sentencing judge in fairly and intelligently exercising the discretion vested in him, the procedural policy of the State encourages him to consider information concerning the convicted person’s reputation, past offenses, health, habits, mental and moral propensities, social background and any other matters that a judge ought to have before him in determining the sentence that should be imposed.”
    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.