Miedzinski v. Landman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The appellees contend that the language of the Act is so vague and uncertain as to violate the Fourteenth Amendment. We find it unnecessary in this case to resolve all the fancied ambiguities in the Act. ‘We have repeatedly held that the general rule of the construction of a statute is that every presumption favors its validity and reasonable doubt is enough to sustain. This Court is very reluctant to defeat the will of the Legislature by declaring its legislation void, if, by any construction, it can possibly be maintained.’ Hellmann v. Collier, 217 Md. 93, 95 . This is particularly true where, as here, the attack is general and not centered upon the application of the Act to an individual charged with a specified criminal act that might call for construction under the facts presented. We think the words of the statute fix an ascertainable standard of guilt and are not so vague as to leave a person of ordinary intelligence in doubt as to the nature of the acts condemned. Cf. Glickfield v. State, 203 Md. 400 , and Blake v. State, 210 Md. 459 .” At page 11.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 13 Md. App. 615 - Waller v. State