Quansah 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. “The Defendant is charged with the crime of second degree assault. Second degree assault is causing offensive physical contact to another person. In order to convict the Defendant of assault, the State must prove one, Defendant caused offensive physical conduct with physical harm to Mr. Poleto. Two, the contact was the result of an intentional [or] a reckless act of the Defendant and was not accidental and the contact was not legally justified. Second degree assault is sometimes called a criminal battery, and it may be intentional or unintentional. An unintentional battery can arise from the contact that is the result of a person’s criminal negligence that legally causes injury to another. A criminal battery is committed if the contact was the result of the Defendant’s recklessness or criminal negligence. Whether a Defendant’s actions constitute criminal negligence or recklessness [turns] on whether those actions under all the circumstances amounted to a disregard of the consequences which might ensue to others.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 222 Md. App. 212 - Wiredu v. State

2. ““Two crimes created by legislative enactment may not be punished separately if the legislature intended the offenses to be punished by one sentence. It is when we are uncertain whether the legislature intended one or more than one sentence that we make use of an aid to statutory interpretation known as the ‘rule of lenity.’ Under that rule, if we are unsure of the legislative intent in punishing offenses as a single merged crime or as distinct offenses, we, in effect, give the defendant the benefit of the doubt and hold that the crimes do merge.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 218 Md. App. 196 - Kyler v. State

3. “[t]his argument ignores that the peace order statute, like second-degree assault, punishes unlawful contact with a person and that appellant's two sentences punish him for the same 'criminal behavior'- the unlawful contact that occurred when he grabbed [the victim].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 240 Md. App. 606 - Simms v. State