65 Md. App. 428 - Holmes v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 state decisions

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

1. “[W]hen a defendant is charged with a greater offense and a lesser included offense based on the same conduct, with jeopardy attaching to both charges at trial, and when the defendant is convicted only of the lesser included charge, he may not receive a sentence for that conviction which exceeds the maximum sentence which could have been imposed had he been convicted of the greater charge.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Holmes

2. “The State says that appellant's failure to object, coupled with his expressing satisfaction with the jury impaneled, is a comparable situation which mandates the same result. Notwithstanding [that] we believe that the trial judge's failure to voir dire the jury panel as to racial bias was error, we are constrained ... to agree with the State that appellant waived that error.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. People v. Pena-Rodriguez

3. “Although we hold that voir dire questioning directed to racial prejudice was not constitutionally required, the wiser course generally is to propound appropriate questions designed to identify racial prejudice if requested by the defendant. The States also are free to allow or require questions not demanded by the Constitution.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Bowie v. State