6 Md. App. 337 - Turner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 1999
6 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 Levy v. State · Wesbecker v. State · Draper v. State · 5 Md. App. 205 - Hale v. State
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * [T]he evidence shows that the check was forged and there was adequate evidence that Turner attempted, with a fraudulent intent, to pass the check. No more is required to support a conviction for uttering, * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““In the absence of a satisfactory explanation the forgery could be inferred from the possession and uttering of the forged instrument, * * *.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Green v. State
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.