46 Md. App. 154 - Noble v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The hearing judge found that any error which may have occurred was harmless because the juror was excused by the trial judge and did not sit on the jury. Although we find it difficult to see how the applicant was injured here, the cases are legion which state that the Maryland Rules are precise rubrics to be read and followed. See, e.g., Countess v. State, 286 Md. 444 , 408 A.2d 1302 (1979). It seems minor discrepancies might be permitted. Terrell v. State, 34 Md.App. 418, 421-22 , 367 A.2d 95 (1977). We think the hearing judge was in error in the instant case under Bunch v. State, 281 Md. 680 , 381 A.2d 1142 (1978).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Taylor v. State · Noble v. State

2. “" 'We think the accused’s right to be present at the bench conference set out above is one of those rights which can be waived by inaction and not one that requires an affirmative act based on an intelligent and knowing understanding of his rights.’ ” (quoting from 46 Md. App. at 161 ).”

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