Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 30 Md. App. 242 - Wilson v. State

30 Md. App. 242 - Wilson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
June 1977
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Johnson v. Zerbst · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Brown v. Illinois

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

  1. ““The doctrine of the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ extends the scope of the exclusionary rule to bar not only evidence directly seized, but also evidence indirectly obtained as a result of information learned or leads obtained in the unlawful search,.... [I]f the defendant established that the evidence resulted from an unlawful search and seizure such evidence cannot be used at all unless the prosecution can convince the trial court that it had an independent origin or that the information gained in the unlawful search did not lead directly or indirectly to the discovery of the challenged evidence.” See also Garrison v. State, 28 Md. App. 257 , 345 A. 2d 86 (1975).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Just as the ‘plain view’ doctrine will not justify the seizure of suspicious articles which are not obviously ‘evidence’ of a crime, it will also not justify the copying of serial numbers from articles found on the premises, but unrelated to the object of a search, in order to determine later whether they are stolen goods ... It is not the subsequent seizure we find abhorrent, but rather the rummaging about as if under a general warrant, in hopes of finding something illicit. It was not ‘immediately apparent’ to the officer that the goods he listed were stolen, even if their quantity did arouse suspicion.” Id., at p. 250”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““[W]hen information serving as a basis for probable cause was obtained or derived as a result of an illegal search, the doctrine of the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ . . . applies to preclude the use of such information as the basis of a search warrant.””
    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.