Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 384 A2D 625 - MacKie v. State

MacKie v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
May 1990
most recently cited

1 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 1990

1 district · 11 state decisions

70197819801990decided

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 18 Md. App. 291 - Bremer v. State · MacK v. State · Commonwealth ex rel. Curry v. Myers · State v. Honie · Dobrolenski 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) When the same conduct of a defendant may establish the commission of more than 1 offense, the defendant may be prosecuted for each offense.... ****** (b) A defendant may be convicted of an offense included in an offense charged in the indictment or information. An offense is so included when: (1) It is established by the proof of the same or less than all the facts required to establish the commission of the offense charged; or (2) It consists of an attempt to commit the offense charged or to commit an offense otherwise included therein; or (3) It involves the same result but differs from the offense charged only in the respect that a less serious injury or risk of injury to the same person, property or public interest or a lesser kind of culpability suffices to establish its commission. (c)The court is not obligated to charge the jury with respect to an included offense unless there is a rational basis in the evidence for a verdict acquitting the defendant of the offense charged and convicting him of the included offense.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A defendant may be convicted of an offense not charged in the indictment or information if included in an offense charged in the indictment or information.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““In order to find the defendant guilty of Possession of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of a Felony, you must find that the following four elements have been established beyond a reasonable doubt: First, there was a deadly weapon, namely a knife. The definition of a deadly weapon in the Criminal Code includes any sort of knife, other than an ordinary pocketknife, carried in a closed position. Second, the defendant possessed the deadly v/eapon. Possession generally means dominion, control and authority. A person is in possession of a deadly weapon, within the meaning of this section, when it is accessible to him during the commission of a crime. Third, the defendant acted knowingly. In other words, he was aware that he possessed the deadly weapon. And, fourth, the defendant possessed the deadly weapon during the commission of the felony charged in Count 1 of the Indictment, namely Murder in the First Degree, or a lesser included felony, such as Murder in the Second Degree, Manslaughter, or Criminally Negligent Homicide.” (Emphasis added.)”
    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.