33 Md. App. 407 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 2004
10 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 Chimel v. California · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Sedillo v. United States · Stanley v. Georgia · Marron v. United States
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Under the plain view doctrine, a warrantless seizure of incriminating evidence may be permitted when the police are lawfully searching a specified area. For the warrantless seizure to be constitutionally valid under the plain view doctrine, however, it must be established that the police had prior justification for an intrusion into the area searched, that the police inadvertently came across the item seized, and that it was ‘immediately apparent’ to the police that the item seized was evidence.” 33 Md. App. at 410 , 365 A. 2d at 55 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The requirement that warrants shall particularly describe the things to be seized makes general searches under them impossible and prevents the seizure of one thing under a warrant describing another. As to what is to be taken, nothing is left to the discretion of the officer executing the warrant.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““[A]nd no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (emphasis supplied).”
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.