Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 373 Md. 637 - Campbell v. State

Campbell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
1
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Jenkins v. State (2003), Miller v. State (2004)

50 state decisions

360200320102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1959

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · MacK v. State · Berry v. State · Parren v. State · United States v. Haddock

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

  1. “In order for the newly discovered evidence to warrant a new trial, the trial judge must find it to be both material and persuasive such that “[t]he newly discovered evidence may well have produced a different result, that is, there was a substantial or significant possibility that the verdict of the trier of fact would have been affected.””
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In the context of a Motion for a New Trial based on newly discovered evidence, there is a threshold question of the trustworthiness of the newly discovered evidence and of the credibility of its source. It is clear that the judge called upon to decide the motion may assess trustworthiness and credibility for himself, even though the verdict in the case was rendered by a jury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The evidence offered as newly discovered must be material to the result and that inquiry is a threshold question. That means that it must be more than “merely cumulative or impeaching. ””
    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.