State v. Bailey’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
82 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably State v. Green (2001), Gisriel v. Ocean City Board of Supervisors of Elections (1997)
82 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 Katz v. United States · Benton v. Maryland · Berger v. New York · Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. v. Los Angeles Rams Football Co. · Clark v. Elza
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In passing upon the validity of a motion to dismiss an indictment, the appellate courts of this State have been steadfast in holding that: (1) the motion is not a proper vehicle for testing the admissibility of testimonial evidence at trial, Richardson v. State, 7 Md.App. 334 , 255 A.2d 463 (1969); (2) an unlawful arrest is not a ground for quashing an indictment, Matthews v. State, 237 Md. 384 , 206 A.2d 714 (1965); (3) a defendant is not entitled to dismissal simply because the prosecution acquired incriminating evidence in violation of law, even if tainted evidence was presented to the grand jury, Everhart v. State, 274 Md. 459 , 337 A.2d 100 (1975); (4) an indictment should be dismissed where it has been returned by grand jurors who had been required to show a belief in God, State v. Madison, 240 Md. 265 , 213 A.2d 880 (1965).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The difference between the two cases is clear. The statutory provisions which require the wiretap order to conform to specific minimum guidelines are those which the legislature perceives to contain minimum safeguards to constitutional rights. Once the directives of the statute have been met and a valid order has been issued, compliance, at least in the area of minimization of unauthorized communications and service of inventory, can be judged by a more lenient substantial compliance standard.” Id. at 153-154.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"We begin our consideration by recognizing that any right of appeal, in either a civil or criminal case, must find its source in an act of the legislature."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Green · Cardinell v. State
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.