21 Md. App. 251 - Baumgartner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently March 2002
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 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 Simmons v. State · Wanzer v. State · State ex rel. Cocking v. Wade · 2 Md. App. 433 - Woodell v. State · Schanker 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““§ 618. Change of custody from one officer to another made only by habeas corpus; exception. “No citizen of this State committed to the custody of an officer for any criminal matter shall be removed from thence into the custody of another officer, unless it be by habeas corpus or by other legal writ, except where the prisoner shall be delivered to a constable or other inferior officer, to be carried to some . common jail, or shall be removed from one place to another within the said county or an adjoining county, in order to discharge or trial in due course of law; or in case of sudden fire or infection, or other necessity; or where the prisoner shall be charged by affidavit or other lawful evidence with treason, felony or other crime alleged to be done in any other of the United States of America or territories thereof — in which last case he shall, on the demand of the executive authority of the state, district or territory from which he fled, be immediately delivered up.” See also id. § 619, relating to transfers of custody between county jail wardens where the accused seeks removal of his case from one county to another.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Only a court order or a statute can relieve a sheriff of his responsibility to keep persons committed to his charge in arcta et salva custodia, strict and safe-keeping-or ... “strict confinement under lock and key.””
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.