State v. Wilkins’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
66 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Hoile v. State (2008), Matthews v. State (2012)
66 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 Hill v. United States · Porzig v. Nolden · Wrenn v. Ohio Department of Mental Health · Gulf Oil Corp. v. Copp Paving Co. · Vrettos v. Plainfield Post Office
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[a] motion to correct an illegal sentence is not an alternative method of obtaining belated appellate review of the proceedings that led to the imposition of judgment and sentence in a criminal case.' " Colvin , 450 Md. at 725 , 150 A.3d 850 (quoting State v. Wilkins , 393 Md. 269 , 273, 900 A.2d 765 (2006) ). Determining whether an illegality "inheres in the sentence itself”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage““when the trial court has allegedly imposed a sentence not permitted by law, the issue should ordinarily be reviewed ... even if no objection was made in the trial court. Such review and correction of an illegal sentence is especially appropriate in light of the fact that Rule 4-345(a), formerly Rule 774 a, provides that ‘[t]he court may correct an illegal sentence at any time.’ Thus, a defendant who fails to object to the imposition of an illegal sentence does not waive forever his right to challenge that sentence.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Montgomery v. State““We hold that a sentencing judge’s failure to recognize his or her right to exercise discretion in the imposition of a sentence does not render the sentence illegal within the meaning of Md. Rule 4-345(a).””
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.