Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 342 Md. 544 - State v. Broberg

State v. Broberg’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
4
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

72 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Merzbacher v. State (1997), Wynn v. State (1998)

72 state decisions

350199620002010decided

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 Mills v. Maryland · Abujasen v. United States · Batson v. Shiflett · Murphy v. Edmonds · Parker v. Los Angeles County Steiner

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

  1. “"The word `ordinarily' [in Rule 8-131(b)(1)] does indicate that there are exceptions. Nevertheless, neither the use of the word `ordinarily' in Rule 8-131(b) nor the principle embodied in the rule, has been treated as granting a general discretion to reach an issue whenever the Court so desires ... Instead, we have held that the `exceptions' to the principle embodied in Rule 8-131(b) are limited to `extraordinary circumstances.'"”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[Ajlthough the relevance of the photographs derived from their use to prove the victim’s identity, which was stipulated, the stipulation did not deprive the photographs of all relevance.... Photographs are inherently cumulative, whether used to illustrate testimony or, as in this case, in support of a stipulation. We reaffirm ... that photographs need not possess essential evidentiary value to be admissible.... Furthermore, photographic evidence ordinarily does not provide the factfinder with new information, but rather with an alternative form of information.... The trial judge had discretion to determine whether this alternative form of information regarding the identity of the victim was wholly needless under the circumstances.... We hold that the trial judge’s decision to admit the photographs was not an abuse of discretion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “[W]here an issue has been put forth as an alternative basis for upholding the conviction, this Court has consistently refused to consider that issue if it was not raised in a certiorari petition, a cross-petition, or the order of this Court granting the petition.”
    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.