Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 Md. App. 705 - Grover v. State

41 Md. App. 705 - Grover v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
June 2007
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Wilson v. State · Dempsey v. State · Bryant v. State · State v. Gover · 40 Md. App. 297 - Gregory 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““In Gregory v. State, supra, we noted that the field of forensic psychiatry was an inexact science and that differences of opinion frequently existed between experts in the field. This being so, we concluded that the opportunity to cross-examine a witness giving such opinion evidence could be of crucial importance. It should not be supposed that Gregory stands for the proposition that the confrontation clause of the constitution precludes the admission of all evidence under exceptions to the hearsay rule. Dr. Azzarelli’s statement in the autopsy report did not express any opinion. It merely stated his findings of the physical condition of the decedent’s brain. As such it falls under the category of a ‘fact or condition objectively ascertained,’ and was probably admissible as a business record as provided by the Md.Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article, Section 10-101. It was clearly admissible under Md.Code, Article 22, § 8 which has been construed by Benjamin v. Woodring, 268 Md. 593, 608 , 303 A.2d 779 (1973) to make autopsy reports admissible as to facts, but not as to opinions.” 41 Md.App. at 710-11 , 398 A.2d 528 (footnote omitted).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.