Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 387 Md. 327 - Goff v. State

Goff v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
1
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

56 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably Chow v. State (2006), Chaney v. State (2007)

56 state decisions

450200520102020decided

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 Oaks v. Connors · Jones v. State · Walczak v. State · Nesbit v. Government Employees Insurance · Price 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “an interpretation and application of Maryland statutory and case law[,]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “intervening agent or occurrence [that] caused the damage.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(a) A court may enter a judgment of restitution that orders a defendant or child respondent to make restitution in addition to any other penalty for the commission of a crime or delinquent act, if: (1) as a direct result of the crime or delinquent act, property of the victim was stolen, damaged, destroyed, converted, or unlawfully obtained, or its value substantially decreased; (2) as a direct result of the crime or delinquent act, the victim suffered: (i) actual medical, dental, hospital, counseling, funeral, or burial expenses or losses; (ii) direct out-of-pocket loss; (iii) loss of earnings; or (iv) expenses incurred with rehabilitation; * * * (b) A victim is presumed to have a right to restitution under subsection (a) of this section if: (1) the victim or the State requests restitution; and (2) the court is presented with competent evidence of any item listed in subsection (a) of this section.”
    2 later decisions 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.