Cohen v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably Metheny v. State (2000), Jones v. State (1985)
35 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 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. United States Bay Counties Dist Council of Carpenters · Estate of Hauptfuhrer v. Commissioner · United States v. Citizens Utilities Co. · Neusbaum v. State · Poole v. United States
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““By pleading nolo contendere, he waived his right to object to the alleged procedural defects and his right to- have them considered on appeal. * * * “Maryland has long recognized that when a person pleads guilty, the judgment entered on the plea cannot ordinarily be reviewed on appeal if the plea was made freely and voluntarily with full understanding of its nature and effect, and the judgment properly entered. * * * This Court has stated that the effect of a plea- of guilty is to waive proof of any facts alleged in the indictment, but not objection to the indictment on the ground that the facts alleged did not constitute an indictable offense, nor objections relating to the jurisdiction of the court to try the defendant. * * * These cases, though involving pleas of guilty, are analogous to the present case wherein a nolo contendere plea was entered, since a ‘plea of nolo contendere is an implied confession of guilt, and for the purposes of the case is equivalent to a plea of guilty.’ “* * * While the appellant argues that some of the matters which we now hold to have been waived (such as the right to a speedy arraignment and trial) involve constitutional rights that ‘may have been submerged and denied’, it has often been stated that even a constitutional right may be waived. * * * Thus, the only questions properly before us for review in the present case are: whether the indictment underlying the judgment below, as well as the statute upon which it was based, failed to prov”
4 later decisions 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.