Privette v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
78 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently February 2010 · most notably Harris v. State (1993), State v. Green (2001)
78 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 Kaczorowski v. Mayor of Baltimore · Jones v. State · Maryland ex rel. Burkhardt v. United States · Pope v. Reading Company · In Re Arnold M.
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he cardinal rule of statutory interpretation is to ascertain and effectuate the legislative intention. The language of the statute itself is the primary source of this intent; and the words used are to be given “their ordinary and popularly understood meaning, absent a manifest contrary legislative intention.” In re Arnold M., 298 Md. [515], 520, 471 A.2d 313 [ (1984) ]. Stated another way, where the language of the statute is free from ambiguity, courts may not disregard the natural import of the words used in order to extend or limit its meaning.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“does not have jurisdiction of an offense otherwise within the District Court’s jurisdiction if a person is charged: ... (ii) in the circuit court with an offense arising out of the same circumstances and within the concurrent jurisdiction of the District Court and the circuit court described under subsection (d) of this section.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harris 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.