24 Md. App. 309 - Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

49 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The statute, after generally defining the crime, designates it as a ‘separate misdemeanor.’ It then provides that the sentence, which may range from 5 to 15 years, shall be ‘in addition to any other sentences’ which may be imposed. The dominant purpose of this language and of all of Section 36B is to stop the alarming rise in the use of handguns in the commission of crimes of violence. Md. Code, Art. 27, § 36 (a).” Id. at 317.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dillon v. State · 43 Md. App. 120 - Stevenson v. State

2. ““It is a generally accepted rule that if the jury should return a verdict which is defective in form or substance, it should not be accepted by the trial judge. It is essential for the prompt and efficient administration of justice to prevent defective verdicts from being entered upon the records of the court as well as to ascertain the real intention of the jury in their finding. Where a verdict is ambiguous, inconsistent, unresponsive, or otherwise defective, it is the duty of the trial judge to call the jury’s attention to the defect and to direct them to put the verdict in proper form either in the presence of the court or by returning to their consultation room for the purpose of further deliberation.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 59 Md. App. 612 - Jenkins v. State

3. ““Under the rule of strict construction applied to statutes in derogation of the common law, it is not to be presumed that the legislature intended to abrogate or modify a rule of the common law on the subject any further than that which is expressly declared or clearly indicated, and the courts are inclined not to extend such statutes, by construction or implication, to situations or parties not fairly or clearly within their provisions, or any further than the language of the statute absolutely requires by express terms or necessary implication. The statute will not be construed to confer or enlarge any rights not clearly given.” (Emphasis supplied; footnotes omitted.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 43 Md. App. 161 - Dillon v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.