Nash v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

31 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] certain commonality [exists] in all these definitions: the notion that a ruling reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard will not be reversed simply because the appellate court would not have made the same ruling. Rather, [a] court's decision is an abuse of discretion when it is well removed from any center mark imagined by the reviewing court and beyond the fringe of what that court deems minimally acceptable .... that kind of distance [from the center mark] can arise in a number of ways.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Heath · 235 Md. App. 540 - Winston, Mayhew & Cannon v. State

2. “Based on the above, we are persuaded that the jury could have found that appellant violated the protective order when he assaulted Warrick. Thus, we shall vacate appellant's sentence for violating a protective order because it merges with his sentence for first-degree assault under the rule of lenity. 6 SENTENCES FOR WEARING, CARRYING, OR TRANSPORTING A HANDGUN AND VIOLATING A PROTECTIVE ORDER VACATED. JUDGMENTS OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY OTHERWISE AFFIRMED. COSTS TO BE ASSESSED 50% TO APPELLANT, AND 50% TO PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY. 1 The term”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 240 Md. App. 606 - Simms v. State

3. “'clearly untenable, unfairly depriving a litigant of a substantial right and denying a just result,' when the ruling is 'violative of fact and logic,' or when it constitutes an 'untenable judicial act that defies reason and works an injustice.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 235 Md. App. 540 - Winston, Mayhew & Cannon v. State