218 Md. App. 689 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts including delinquent acts as defined by [Md.] Code [1973, 2013 Repl. Vol.], Courts [& Judicial Proceedings] Article, § 3-8A-01 is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. Such evidence, however, may be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, common scheme or plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 232 Md. App. 583 - Smith v. State · 222 Md. App. 118 - Stevenson v. State

2. “As Judge Nazarian recently wrote for this Court in Smith v. State , 218 Md. App. 689 , 704, 98 A.3d 444 (2014) : It is not enough, though, for evidence to be relevant. Under Maryland Rule 5-403, the trial court should exclude relevant evidence if the probative value of the evidence”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 236 Md. App. 533 - Terrence Newman v. State · 239 Md. App. 168 - Walter v. State

3. “bad act” evidence has special relevance, the court must decide whether the State proved the defendant's involvement in the “bad act” by “ ‘clear and convincing evidence.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 222 Md. App. 118 - Stevenson v. State