Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 46 Md. App. 1 - Mason v. State

46 Md. App. 1 - Mason v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
October 2021
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently October 2021

22 state decisions

12019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on 17 Cal. 3d 614 - People v. Richards · 57 Ill. 2d 279 - People v. Mahle · State v. Reese · Cox v. State · 23 Wash. App. 39 - State v. Eilts

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

  1. ““the clear sense of § 640(b) ... seems unmistakably to contemplate restitution for the crimes as to which incarceration might otherwise be imposed.” Id. at 6, 415 A.2d 315 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The single issue before us on this appeal is the permitted breadth of an order of restitution. May a convicted thief (we use that term in its broadest and most informal sense) be required, as a condition of probation, to make restitution to the world for his multitudinous peculations or must the restitution be limited by the losses established in the actual case, the conviction as to which serves as the predicate for the sentence? We hold that the latter is the appropriate and legally required limitation upon court-ordered restitution.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Upon conviction for a crime where property of another has been stolen, converted, unlawfully obtained, or its value substantially decreased as a direct result of the crime, or where the victim suffered actual medical expenses, direct out of pocket losses, or loss of earnings as a direct result of the crime, the court may order the defendant to make restitution in addition to any other penalty provided for the commission of the crime.”
    1 later decision 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.