State v. Williamson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Sections 1 and 2 are clear, unlike what the State asserts. [ ] Section 1 provides a period of 10 years from the imposition of sentence within which to file a post conviction petition and Section 2 admonishes that prospective imple mentation is mandated—that the 10-year limitation “shall be construed prospectively,” that it “apply only to post conviction proceedings for sentences imposed on or after the effective date of the Act” and that it “may not be applied or interpreted to have any effect on or application to post conviction petitions for sentences imposed before the effective date of the Act.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 205 Md. App. 141 - Lopez v. State

2. “That this Act shall be construed prospectively to apply only to post-conviction proceedings for sentences imposed on or after the effective date of this Act and may not be applied or interpreted to have any effect on or application to post-conviction petitions for sentences imposed before the effective date of this Act.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 205 Md. App. 141 - Lopez v. State

3. ““II. Unless extraordinary cause is shown, in a case in which a sentence of death has not been imposed, a petition under this subtitle may not be filed later than 10 years from the imposition of sentence.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Alston v. State