State v. Leach’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

cited by 61 later decisions

states following

April 2020

most recently cited

61 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably McDonald v. State (1997), Moye v. State (2002)

61 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 Henson v. State · Tasco v. State · Garrison v. State · Cooper v. State · Rucker v. State

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

“Here the fact finding that Michael was the occupant of the Premises precludes inferring that Stephen had joint dominion and control with Michael over the entire apartment and over everything contained anywhere in it. Even though Stephen had ready access to the apartment, it cannot be reasonably inferred that he exercised restraining or directing influence over PCP in a closed container on the bedroom dresser or over paraphernalia in the bedroom closet. If one assumes that the scales and magnifier found in plain view in the kitchen at the time of the search were always kept there, still those items are intrinsically innocuous. They become significant by association with drugs or cutting agents.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Pringle v. State · Moye v. State
“‘Possession’ means ‘the exercise of actual or constructive dominion or control over a thing by one or more persons.’ Art. 27, § 277(s). The statute recognizes, as we held in Henson v. State, 236 Md. 518, 525 , 204 A.2d 516, 520 (1964), that possession may be constructive. Possession may also' be joint. See Garrison v. State, 272 Md. 123, 128 , 321 A.2d 767, 770 (1974); Rucker v. State, 196 Md. 334, 340 , 76 A.2d 572, 574 (1950). But the ‘evidence must show directly or support a rational inference that the accused did in fact exercise some dominion or control over the prohibited ... drug in the sense contemplated by the statute, i.e., that [the accused] exercised some restraining or directing influence over it.’ Garrison, supra, 272 Md. at 142 , 321 A.2d at 777 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Pringle v. State · Livingston 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.