58 Md. App. 637 - Hines v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2 district · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Geesa v. State (1991), Oken v. State (1992)
2 district · 46 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Jackson v. Virginia · Barker v. Wingo · United States v. Marion · Spano v. People of the State of New York · Houltin v. United States
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The fact that [the victim’s) body was nude; that her halter top was over her face and the rest of her clothing was piled beside her; that she was lying on her back with her legs spread apart gives rise to permissible inferences that (a) there had been a sexual touching without her consent and (b) that her assailant intended to rape when he attacked her. It is true that other inferences might be drawn from the same facts; but despite frequent expressions to the contrary, circumstantial evidence may be sufficient to support a conviction even if the circumstanc es do not exclude every hypothesis consistent with innocence____ Finally, the existence of the weapon that was used to kill [the victim] is a circumstance sufficient to raise the necessary inference that the inferred attempted rape constituted an attempted rape in the first degree.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[i]f an expert witness cannot, will not or does not render his [or her] opinion to a reasonable degree of probability within the field of his [or her] expertise, the opinion may be excluded from evidence”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.