Fenner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2024 · most notably Owens v. State (2007), 158 Md. App. 194 - Allen v. State (2004)
33 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · United States v. Wade · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Rhode Island v. Innis · Kirby v. Illinois
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We hold that nothing in the setting of petitioner’s January 10, 2001 bail review hearing can be said to have coerced him into making his inculpatory statement. The question posed, “Is there anything you’d like to tell me about yourself, sir?,” was a routine question to ask in a setting such as a bail review hearing. Questions posed to an arrestee by a judge regarding matters relevant to bail, asked in the setting of a bail review hearing, do not normally amount to an “interrogation” requiring that the arrestee be again advised of his Miranda rights in order that his responses may be later admitted into evidence at his merits trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kirton“[o]nce a finding of relevancy has been made, we are generally loath to reverse a trial court unless the evidence is plainly inadmissible under a specific rule or principle of law or there is a clear showing of an abuse of discretion”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is well established in Maryland that the admission of relevant evidence, . . . is committed to the considerable and sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
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.