Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably Harris v. State (1993), Morris v. Prince George's County (1990)
35 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
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Albernaz v. United States · United States v. Batchelder · Gore v. United States · United States v. Batchelder · Kaczorowski v. Mayor of Baltimore
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e believe the legislative intent is made manifest by the words of the statute, and particularly the definition of “manufacture” found in § 277(p). This statutory definition does not include the packaging or repackaging of any controlled dangerous substance. It includes only packaging or repackaging of controlled dangerous substances that have been manufactured in the manner described by the legislature. The language of § 277(p) concerning “packaging or repackaging of the substance or labeling or relabeling of its containers” refers back to the controlled dangerous substance that is produced by extraction or by means of chemical synthesis, or by both means. The obvious legislative intent was to include packaging and labeling within the definition of “manufacture” when that packaging or labeling is in conjunction with a true manufacturing process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Butler v. State““Manufacture” shall mean the production ... of a controlled dangerous substance either directly or indirectly by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis and includes any packaging or repackaging of the substance or labeling or relabeling of its containers....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Butler v. State““ ‘No man incurs a penalty unless the act which subjects him to it, is clearly, both within the spirit and letter of the statute. Things which do not come within the words are not to be brought within them by construction.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.