Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 227 Md. 115 - Humphreys v. State

Humphreys v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
April 2013
most recently cited

2 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2013 · most notably Giles v. State of Maryland (1967), Giles v. State (1962)

2 district · 40 state decisions

200196119701980199020002010decided

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 Bryant v. State · Brown v. State · Contee v. State · Glaros v. State · Ledbetter 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is well established that there is no requirement that the victim of the crime of rape be chaste, as far as the common law is concerned. ‘But the law of England . . . holds it to be felony to force even a concubine or harlot.’ 4 Blackstone, Commentaries 213. See also . . . State v. Beltz, 279 N.W. 386 (Iowa 1938); Perkins, Criminal Law, Chap. 2, p. 116. However, the general character of the prosecutrix as to chastity or unchastity is admissible in the majority of common law jurisdictions, including Maryland, because of its probative value in determining whether the act was committed with or without her consent, a necessary element in the comm,on law crime of rape. Shartzer v. State, 63 Md. 149 (1885); Brown v. State, 72 Md. 468 , 20 Atl. 186 (1890). See also 140 A.L.R. 380 and 1 Wigmore, Evidence (3rd ed) § 62.” (Emphasis supplied).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is settled law in this State in a case where prejudice against the Negro race may be a factor in determining a prospective juror’s attitude toward a particular defendant, the existence of such prejudice is a proper area of inquiry in the voir dire examination of the jurors____ Where such inquiry is sought on voir dire examination and the trial court refuses to ask questions of the jurors directed toward this end, we have held that this “failure to elicit from the jurors the essence of the information sought by the appellant was reversible error----” (Emphasis in original, citations omitted)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““. . . where prejudice against the Negro race may be a factor in determining a prospective juror’s attitude toward a particular defendant. . . .” Humphreys, supra, 227 Md. at 118 .”
    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.