59 Md. App. 97 - Garrett v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Jones v. State (1994), Gargliano v. State (1994)
42 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 Dorsey v. State · United States v. Testan · United States v. Security Industrial Bank · Laverick v. United States · United States v. Rodgers
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““the two convictions serving as the predicate for the enhanced sentence must precede in time the commission of the offense upon which the instant conviction is based. Deterrence, rather than retribution, is the legislative intent we shall infer; and that, as the cited authority makes clear, requires that the instant offense — the one for which the enhanced punishment is imposed — be committed after the two predicate convictions.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Any person who (1) has been convicted on two separate occasions of a crime of violence where the convictions do not arise from a single incident, and (2) has served at least one term of confinement in a correctional institution as a result of a conviction of a crime of violence, shall be sentenced, on being convicted a third time of a crime of violence, to imprisonment for the term allowed by law, but, in any event, not less than 25 years____ A separate occasion shall be considered one in which the second or succeeding offense is committed after there has been a charging document filed for the preceding occasion."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gargliano v. State““In determining whether an error is harmless, we look to see whether the ‘erroneous ruling, in relation to the totality of the evidence, played a significant role in influencing the rendition of the verdict, to the prejudice of the appellant.’ Unless we, ‘upon [our] own independent re view of the record, [are] able to declare a belief, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the error in no way influenced the verdict, such error cannot be deemed “harmless” and a reversal is mandated.’ ””
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.