Divver v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
45 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably 148 Md. App. 601 - Wilson v. State (2002), Glover v. State (2002)
45 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 Barker v. Wingo · Burks v. United States · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Ball v. United States · Houltin 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A deliberate attempt to delay the trial in order to hamper the defense should be weighed heavily against the government. A more neutral reason such as negligence or overcrowded courts should be weighed less heavily but nevertheless should be considered since the ultimate responsibility for such circumstances must rest with the government rather than with the defendant. Finally, a valid reason, such as a missing witness, should serve to justify appropriate delay.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“a relatively run-of-the-mill District Court case,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In the opinion in Epps , however, this Court referred to “ ‘those personal factors’ in denials of speedy trials such as interference with the defendant’s liberty, the disruption of his employment, the drain of his financial resources, the curtailment of his associations, his subjection to public obloquy and the creation of anxiety in him, his family and friends.” 276 Md. at 116 , 345 A.2d at 75 . With respect to these factors, the Epps Court quoted the following passage from the concurring opinion of Justice White in Barker where he, joined by Justice Brennan, said: “But, for those who desire an early trial, these personal factors should prevail if the only countervailing considerations offered by the State are those connected with crowded dockets and prosecutorial case loads. A defendant desiring a speedy trial, therefore, should have it within some reasonable time; and only special circumstances presenting a more pressing public need with respect to the case itself should suffice to justify delay.” Id. (quoting Barker, 407 U.S. at 537 , 92 S.Ct. at 2195 , 33 L.Ed.2d at 121 (White, J., concurring)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Fields 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.