Jordan v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2025 · most notably Henry v. State (1991), Ayers v. State (1994)
62 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Faretta v. California · Arizona v. Fulminante · Harris v. New York · Rock v. Arkansas
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[W]hen the trial court has allegedly imposed a sentence not permitted by law, the issue should ordinarily be reviewed on direct appeal even if no objection was made in the trial court. Such review and correction of an illegal sentence is especially appropriate in light of the fact that Rule 4-345(a) ... provides that ‘[t]he court may correct an illegal sentence at any time.’ Thus, a defendant who fails to object to the imposition of the illegal sentence does not waive forever his right to challenge that sentence.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Griffin v. State““It is well settled in Maryland that only one sentence can be imposed for a single common law conspiracy no matter how many criminal acts the conspirators have agreed to commit. The unit of prosecution is the agreement or combination rather than each of its criminal objectives. In Mason v. State, 302 Md. 434, 445 , 488 A.2d 955, 960 (1985), we stated that a ‘conspiracy remains one offense regardless of how many repeated violations of the law may have been the object of the conspiracy.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Henry v. State“Henry was found to have conspired with others to commit murder and robbery. Of the two, the crime of murder carries the severe penalty. Under Md.Code (1957, 1987 RepLVol.) Ait. 27, § 38, the severe crime Henry “conspired to commit” was murder, and thus murder is the guideline offense for sentencing purposes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.