5 Md. App. 500 - Lipscomb v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is well settled that imposition of sentence in a criminal case in this State is a matter peculiarly within the province of the trial judge, Reid v. State, 200 Md. 89 , Gee v. State, 2 Md. App. 61 ; and that a sentence within limits prescribed by law will be reviewed on appeal only where grossly and inordinately disproportionate to the offense to such an extent that the sentence was evidently dictated not by a sense of public duty, but by passion, prejudice, ill will, or other unworthy motive. James v. State, 242 Md. 424 , Fisher v. State, 1 Md. App. 505 . “The sentence imposed was within statutory limits, and there is no showing that it was prompted by any unworthy motive on the part of the trial judge.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 28 Md. App. 150 - Anglin v. State

2. “"We think it clear from the above that the constitutional predicate underlying Bruton is the Sixth Amendment right of an accused to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him.1 The present case is unlike Bruton , however, since here the confessing co-defendant, Dabney, did testify at the trial, and was cross-examined by the appellant, so that his Sixth Amendment right to confront and cross-examine Dabney was not violated.” (Footnote omitted).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 55 Md. App. 356 - Sye v. State