Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 278 Md. 389 - Howell v. State

Howell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

64
cited by 64 later decisions
3
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

2 district · 62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Wheeler v. State (1978), Schweitzer v. Brewer (1977)

2 district · 62 state decisions

21019761980199020002010decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 921 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act)

Relies on Glidden Company v. Zdanok Et Al. · Tot v. United States · State v. Fabritz · St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. Insurance Commissioner · United States v. Decker

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

  1. “"to be a firearm it must propel a missile by gunpowder or some such similar explosive ....””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"(b) Handgun. — ‘Handgun’ means any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed on the person, including a short-barreled shotgun and a short-barreled rifle as these terms are defined below, except it does not include a shotgun, rifle or antique firearm as those terms are defined below.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““If we regard the statute here as intending to define the term handgun as ‘any pistol, revolver, or other firearm’ (Emphasis added.) then the only way that ‘no word, clause, sentence, or phrase [may not] be rendered surplusage, superfluous, meaningless, or nugatory,’ is to conclude that the presence of the word ‘other’ before ‘firearm’ is an indication that the General Assembly intended that to be a ‘handgun’ the device under consideration must be a firearm.””
    2 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.