Bishop v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 33 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under an agreed statement of facts both the State and the defense agree as to the ultimate facts. Then the facts are not in dispute, and there can be, by definition, no factual conflict. The trier of fact is not called upon to determine the facts as the agreement is to the truth of the ultimate facts themselves. There is no fact-finding function left to perform. To render judgment, the court simply applies the law to the facts agreed upon[.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Sanmartin Prado

2. “may voluntarily, knowingly, and understanding^ consent to the imposition of a prison sentence even if he is unwilling or unable to admit his participation in the acts constituting the crime”). 2 . At a hearing on March 20, 2009, the starting date was changed to August 25, 2005. 3 . Cts. & Jud. Proc. Art. 12-702(b) sets forth conditions that must be satisfied before a court, upon re-sentencing, may impose an increased sentence:”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 201 Md. App. 512 - Tolson v. State

3. “[WJhile most pleas of guilty consist of both a waiver of trial and an express admission of guilt, the latter element is not a constitutional requisite to the imposition of criminal penalty. An individual accused of [a] crime may voluntarily, knowingly, and understandingly consent to the imposition of a prison sentence even if he [or she] is unwilling or unable to admit his participation in the acts constituting the crime.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jackson v. State