Hyde v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 86 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ 'Premeditated’ means that the killing must have been meditated, planned in the mind, beforehand; that the design to kill must have preceded the killing by an appreciable length of time, time enough to deliberate; and in order to justify a conviction of first de gree murder, the trier of facts must find the actual intent (wilfulness), the fully formed purpose to kill (deliberation), with enough time for deliberation and premeditation to convince the trier of facts that this purpose is not the immediate offspring of rashness and impetuous temper (lack of deliberation and premeditation), but that the mind has become fully conscious of its own design. Although the design to kill must precede the killing by some appreciable length of time, that time need not be long. If the killing be not the instant effect of impulse, if there be hesitation or doubt to overcome, a choice made as the result of thought, however short the struggle between the intention and the act, it is sufficient to characterize the crime as deliberate and premeditated murder. Cummings v. State, 223 Md. 606 , 165 A. 2d 886 ; Faulcon v. State, 211 Md. 249 , 126 A. 2d 858 ; Dunn v. State, 226 Md. 463 , 174 A. 2d 185 ; Chisley v. State, 202 Md. 87, 106 , 95 A. 2d 577 . And the question of premeditation must be determined by the facts of each particular case. Cuturnings v. State; Chisley v. State, both supra.””

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wilson v. State · 28 Md. App. 640 - Evans v. State

2. “"Maryland Rule 831 (subsections c 2, and c 4) provides that appellant's brief shall contain `a succinct statement of the questions presented separately numbered,' and `argument in support of the position of the appellant.' Appellant's brief contains neither in respect to the matter now under consideration, and we have held that a question not presented or argued in appellant's brief was not before the Court of Appeals, although it was brought to the attention of the Court during argument."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Harmon v. State Roads Commission · 118 Md. App. 683 - Moosavi v. State

3. ““We turn now to the objection to the written confession. The record, we think, amply sustains the trial judge in his finding that the confession was freely and voluntarily made, and not coerced. Here, we do not have the usual factors that have been held to render a confession coerced, such as an ignorant, illiterate accused, easily open to suggestion; physical force; prolonged and uninterrupted interrogation; shuttling of the prisoner from one place to another for the purpose of confusing him; failing to provide food, etc. The only complaints advanced by the appellant are that the police (although not actually preventing his obtention of counsel) did not actually assist him in getting counsel, and the police failed to tell him he did not have to answer questions.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hyde v. State