Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 203 MDAPP 110 - Kohler v. State

Kohler v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Burks v. United States · Abuelhawa v. United States · In Re Petition for Writ of Prohibition · Roary v. State · Campbell 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Maryland does not have an “aiding and abetting” statute. Nevertheless, under established case law, a person who did not actually commit the crime in question may nevertheless be guilty to the same degree as the person who did. Whereas principals in the first degree “commit the deed as perpetrating actors, either by their own hand or by the hand of an innocent agent,” principals in the second degree are “present, actually or constructively, aiding and abetting the commission of the crime, but not themselves committing it[.]” “An aider is one who assists, supports or supplements the efforts of another in the commission of a crime.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Whereas principals in the first degree “commit the deed as perpetrating actors, either by their own hand or by the hand of an innocent agent,” principals in the second degree are “present, actually or constructively, aiding and abetting the commission of the crime, but not themselves committing it[.]” “An aider is one who assists, supports or supplements the efforts of another in the commission of a crime.” “An abettor is one who instigates, advises or encourages the commission of a crime.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “for the State to separately charge the defendant with the predicate felony”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.