42 Md. App. 107 - Whitfield v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The gun’s presence in the penal institution is a “bell ringer” that an escape attempt is imminent, with the strong possibility that one or more homicides may occur. It behooves the officials to move with alacrity to locate the weapon and confiscate it in order to protect their own lives, the lives of the prison populace, visitors who might be in the institution at the time, and the public generally.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Whitfield v. State · 89 Md. App. 428 - Hill v. State

2. ““A critical distinction is made, however, between deliberate ‘prosecutorial or judicial overreaching,’ on the one hand, and ‘prosecutorial or judicial error,’ on the other hand. Mere error, judicial or prosecutorial, even where it is grievous enough 1) to cause a mistrial or 2) to cause an appellate reversal, will not bar a subsequent retrial. Except in those rare instances where the prosecution or the court has deliberately sabotaged a trial that was going badly, the available redress where an irremediable error is recognized in mid-trial is the declaration of a mistrial followed by a retrial; the available redress where a reversible error has occurred in a trial which runs its full course and results in a conviction is a reversal followed by a retrial. The only time that retrial is barred under double jeopardy principles is when there has been such prosecutorial or judicial overreaching as to have mounted to a deliberate and intentional sabotaging of the earlier trial.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 43 Md. App. 20 - Tabbs v. State

3. “... The questioning of Whitfield was not an interrogation, looking toward prosecution, but an on-the-scene investigation for a deadly weapon which presented a threat to the security of the jail. State v. LaRue, supra . Moreover, a fair reading of the record discloses that the correctional officers were preoccupied more so with the recovery of the gun, whether there were other guns inside the jail, and the details of the escape attempt, than with the apprehension and punishment of Whitfield.”

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