Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 61 Md. App. 477 - Smitley v. State

61 Md. App. 477 - Smitley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently August 2014

23 state decisions

1201985199020002010decided

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 Coles v. State · 58 Md. App. 113 - Mitchell v. State · 45 Md. App. 596 - Williams 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It may even be possible, pursuant to § 642 of art. 27, for the court to direct execution of the suspended sentence, suspend anew a part of that sentence, place the defendant on further probation, and continue an order of restitution as a condition of the new probation. What the court may not do, however, when the restitution is not ‘as a sentence’ but only a condition of probation, is to direct execution of the full term of the suspended sentence and continue the restitution order, either ‘as a sentence’ or as a condition to some further probation. That is equivalent to increasing, not merely implementing, the suspended sentence.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “If the order is made “as a sentence,” it may, if the State shows an ability on 'the part of the defendant- to comply with the order, be enforced through contempt proceedings. If, on the other hand, the order is not stated “as a sentence” but rather as a condition of probation or parole, it may be enforced through the power to revoke the probation or parole, (footnote omitted)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “9. Shall pay-through t-he-Sheriff’s Department the-sum-of $_ as-follows. □ Court costs of $130; □ Fine of $_; In such installments as the Sheriffs Department shall determine and direct or; In installments of $_per__ 9a. Shall pay through the Division of Parole and Probation the sum of $530.00 as follows: □ Attorney’s fee of $-to_, whose address is 0 Restitution of $400.00 to Banyat Csiramongkolsiri whose address is 222 St. Paul Street, Apartment 802 In such installments as the Division shall determine and direct or; In installments of $_per_ 10. Special conditions as follows: For collection only.”
    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.