Wilkins v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Burch v. State (1997), State v. Williams (2007)
25 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 Soberon v. United States · Needler v. Valley National Bank of Arizona · Hunt v. State · Walczak v. State · Hunt v. State
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Hunt v. State, 312 Md. 494, 510 , 540 A.2d 1125, 1133 (1988), we held that the Legislature did not intend that a separate punishment should be imposed for carrying, wearing, or transporting a handgun in addition to that imposed for using a handgun during commission of a felony or crime of violence. We took the position that the sentence for carrying, wearing, or transporting the handgun should merge into the sentence for using the handgun during the commission of a felony or crime of violence. In Hunt, the separate sentence for wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun was held to be illegal, and we vacated it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“On numerous occasions this Court has pointed out that “ ‘illegal sentences may be challenged at any time, even on appeal,’ ” Spitzinger v. State, 340 Md. 114, 122 , 665 A.2d 685, 688-689 (1995), quoting Campbell v. State, 325 Md. 488, 509 , 601 A.2d 667, 677 (1992). See, e.g., Jordan v. State, 323 Md. 151, 161 , 591 A.2d 875, 880 (1991) (even though the defendant did not raise the issue at trial, “Jordan has not waived his right to object to the unlawful sentence”); Osborne v. State, 304 Md. 323 , 326 n. 1, 499 A.2d 170 , 171 n. 1 (1985) (“where the trial court has allegedly imposed an illegal sentence, the issue may be reviewed on direct appeal even if no objection was made in the trial court”); Matthews v. State, 304 Md. 281, 287-288 , 498 A.2d 655, 658 (1985); Walczak v. State, 302 Md. 422, 427 , 488 A.2d 949, 951 (1985). Consequently, Wilkins’s separate sentence for wearing or carrying a handgun should be vacated.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“when convictions for use of a handgun in the commission of a crime of violence, and wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun are based upon the same acts, separate sentences for those convictions will not stand.”
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.