63 Md. App. 376 - Lyles v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently December 2003 · most notably State v. Lyles (1986), Muir v. State (1986)
37 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 Logan v. State · Robinson v. Board of County Commissioners · Drug Fair of Maryland, Inc. v. Smith · Kucharczyk v. State · Johnson 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"(d) Allocution and Information in Mitigation —Before imposing sentence, the court shall afford the defendant the opportunity, personally and through counsel, to make a statement and to present information in mitigation of punishment."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“We agree with the State that this issue has not been preserved for review. Appellant moved for judgment of acquittal at the end of the State’s case and at the end of all of the evidence. On neither occasion did he present argument in support of his motion. In fact, in response to the judge’s question, whether he wished to be heard in connection with the motion at the end of the evidence, his counsel responded, “I’ll waive.” We agree that without intending to do so, he did, in fact, “waive” the argument.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The requirements of Maryland Rule 4-342(d) (formerly Maryland Rule 772(d)) are mandatory____ Although the court did hear from the appellant’s counsel, the rule is clear that the appellant must be afforded an opportunity, both personally and through counsel. Failure to afford the opportunity, personally, is error, the proper remedy for which is remand for resentencing.”
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.