46 Md. App. 138 - Murphy v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently August 2012 · most notably Attorney Grievance Commission v. Mooney (2000), In re Dodson (1990)
39 state decisions
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 Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co. · Zurcher v. Stanford Daily · New York Shipping Ass'n v. Federal Maritime Commission · State v. Hicks · State v. Roll and Scholl
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]n attorney plays such an integral role in the judicial process that without his presence the wheels of justice must, necessarily, grind to a halt. The attorney’s absence from the courtroom is immediately cognizable by the judge and intrudes upon the operation and dignity of the court.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a. Constructive contempt proceedings may be instituted by the court of its own motion, by the State’s attorney or by any person having actual knowledge of the alleged contempt. b. 1. Show Cause Order (a) Issuance. If the court determines to cite the defendant for contempt, it shall issue an order requiring the defendant to show cause why an order adjudging him in contempt shall not be passed within the time stated therein, (b) Contents. The show cause order shall state the time and place of hearing, allowing a reasonable time for the preparation of the defense, and shall state the essential facts constituting the contempt charged, (c) Service. The show cause order shall be served upon the defendant pursuant to Rule 104 (Service of Process—Generally) unless the defendant has appeared as a party in the action in which the contempt is charged, in which case service shall be in the manner prescribed by the court. 2. Written Statement. A copy of any writing or document filed in support of the alleged contempt shall also be served upon the defendant, c. If the defendant shall answer, the charge shall be set for hearing. If no cause be shown within the time named in the order, the case shall be heard ex parte, d. 1. Appointment of Prosecutor. The court may designate the State’s attorney or any other member of the bar to prosecute the proceeding. 2. When Judge Disqualified. Unless a defendant otherwise consents, the judge who issued a citation for constructive contempt shall be disqu”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. King v. State“a. A direct contempt may be punished summarily by the court against which the contempt was committed, b. Where a direct contempt is committed, the court shall sign a written order to that effect. The order shall recite the facts, be signed by the judge and entered of record. The order shall state which of the facts were known to the court of its own knowledge and as to any facts not so known, the basis for the court’s finding with respect thereto, c. The' record in such cases shall consist of (1) such order of contempt, (2) any affidavit filed by the defendant, (3) any affidavit filed by the State’s attorney in support of the order of contempt, if the court directed him to investigate or prosecute the contempt, and (4) any testimony offered.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. King v. State
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.