55 Md. App. 663 - Boone v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently August 2014
10 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 Barker v. Wingo · Morrissey v. Brewer · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex · Vitek v. Jones
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Our holding that the State may conduct a revocation hearing at any time, even if the probationary period has expired, is not intended to imply that the state is relieved of its obligation to initiate and consummate such hearings diligently and promptly. The probationer is entitled to a fair hearing where he can confront his accusers and present his defense____ It is not merely the right to a hearing which is guaranteed, but the fairness of that hearing as well. ‘The proceedings are to be tested by fundamental fairness—the touchstone of due process.’ Numerous cases support our view that in order to comply with the dictates of due process, the State must bring about the revocation hearing with due diligence or reasonable promptness so as to avoid prejudice to the defendant____ We also believe that whether the State has been reasonable in proceeding with a revocation hearing is the test. We do not perceive the need to set forth the factors a court will consider in determining whether the State has been diligent in instituting and conducting hearings under the statute here involved. However, we think it fair to say that, at a minimum, the State should make reasonable efforts to initiate the proceedings and to locate and serve the defendant with process so as to bring him to trial promptly. On the other hand, we think the trial court should consider the availability of the defendant to receive such process and the extent to which he has made his presence known in the community in”
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.