Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 362 Md. 467 - State v. Marr

State v. Marr’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

1 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably State v. Smullen (2004), Porter v. State (2017)

1 district · 26 state decisions

130200120102020decided

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 National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · 25 Cal. 3d 668 - People v. Flannel · Brulotte Et Al. v. Thys Company · Starr v. United States · Vrettos v. Plainfield Post Office

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

  1. “(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe himself in apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant; (2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger; (3) The accused claiming the right of self-defense must not have been the aggressor or provoked the conflict; and (4) The force used must have not been unreasonable and excessive, that is, the force must not have been more force than the exigency demanded.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “`actual, subjective belief on the part of the accused that he/she is in apparent imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from the assailant, requiring the use of deadly force, is not an objectively reasonable belief.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““The objective standard does not require the jury to ignore the defendant’s perceptions in determining the reasonableness of his or her conduct. In making that determination, the facts or circumstances must be taken as perceived by the defendant, even if they were not the true facts or circumstances, so long as a reasonable person in the defendant’s position could also reasonably perceive the facts or circumstances in that way.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.