Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 38 Md. App. 465 - Brafman v. State

38 Md. App. 465 - Brafman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
4
states following
September 2013
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably State v. Faulkner (1989), 101 Md. App. 1 - Wieland v. State (1994)

28 state decisions

8019781980199020002010decided

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 United States v. Stafoff · Ross v. State · McKnight v. State · A. S. Abell Co. v. Sweeney · Berger 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““[S]ome of the wiser opinions ... recognize that the problem is . . . one of balancing, on the one side, the actual need for the other-crimes evidence in light of the issues and the other evidence available to the prosecution, the convincingness of the evidence that the other crimes were committed and that the accused was the actor, and the strength or weakness of the other crimes evidence in supporting the issue, and on the other, the degree to which the jury will probably be roused by the evidence to overmastering hostility.” (Footnotes omitted.)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““To prove other like crimes by the accused so nearly identical in method as to earmark them as the handiwork of the accused. Here much more is demanded than the mere repeated commission of crimes of the same class, such as repeated burglaries or thefts. The device used must be so unusual and distinctive as to be like a signature.””
    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.