Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 288 Md. 456 - McClain v. State

McClain v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
states following
September 2012
most recently cited

47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently September 2012 · most notably State v. Frazier (1984), Logan v. State (1981)

47 state decisions

2501980199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Katz v. United States · United States v. Wade · Chimel v. California · Stovall v. Denno

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

  1. “"A defendant who is detained pursuant to an arrest shall be taken before a judicial officer without unnecessary delay and in no event later than 24 hours after arrest. A charging document shall be filed promptly after arrest if not already filed.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “The procedural requirements of M.D.R. 723 b bolster in substantial fashion several fundamental constitutional guarantees, including the right of a defendant to be informed of the accusation against him .. .; the right to be free from unauthorized and unreasonable seizures of his person ...; the right to be allowed counsel ..., and to have counsel appointed for him if indigent..., as well as the due process right to be free from coercive investigatory methods....” This Court then concluded (id. at 323, emphasis supplied):”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"This case is unlike many cases in which a retroactive application of a new rule has been sought in that it is not a collateral attack on a prior judgment nor is it one on direct review where the point was not raised in the trial court and it is sought to be raised on appellate review. Here, as we have already held, the point was raised below and McClain simply seeks to have applied in his case the same rule which was applied in Johnson’s case.” Id. 288 Md. at 463 .”
    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.