Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 6 Md. App. 496 - Bailey v. State

6 Md. App. 496 - Bailey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
October 2008
most recently cited

37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently October 2008 · most notably Johnson v. State (1982), Colvin v. State (1984)

37 state decisions

24019691970198019902000decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Wade · Mapp v. Ohio · Simmons v. United States · Stovall v. Denno

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

  1. ““* * * The Supreme Court recognized in Chapman v. State of California, 386 U.S. 18 , that states have harmless-error statutes or rules. It said, at 22, that these rules ‘serve a very useful purpose insofar as they block setting aside convictions for small errors or defects that have little, if any, likelihood of having changed the result of the trial.’ It concluded that ‘there may be some constitutional errors which in the setting of a particular case are so unimportant and insignificant that they may, consistent with the Federal Constitution, be deemed harmless, not requiring the automatic reversal of the conviction.’ See Fahy v. State of Connecticut, 375 U. S. 85 . The opinions of this State have followed a harmless-error rule.””
    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.