65 Md. App. 637 - Dunn v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 2000
8 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 Ashe v. Swenson · Green v. United States · Scott v. State · Kaylor v. State · MacKall 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While the doctrine of collateral estop-pel is applicable to criminal cases as a matter of common law, Bowling v. State, [ 298 Md. 396 ,] 470 A.2d 797 (Md.1984), and the principle is embodied in the fifth amendment prohibition against double jeopardy, Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 [, 90 S.Ct. 1189 , 25 L.Ed.2d 469 ] (1970), 7 it has never been held to apply to revocation of probation proceedings. See Scott v. State, [ 238 Md. 265 ,] 208 A.2d 575 (Md.1965); 76 A.L.R.3d 564 , Probation Revooation — Following Acquittal .... The reason for this is due to the fundamental difference between the nature and levels of proof in a criminal proceeding and a revocation of probation hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]hether an object that is not a weapon per se is used, carried or possessed as a weapon on a particular occasion depends upon the surrounding circumstances. If the object, although normally a tool, is closely akin to a weapon, as a knife or an axe, far less proof should be required to persuade one of its character as a weapon on a given occasion than if the object bears little or no resemblance to traditional weapons, as the fingernail file, pen, telephone cord, or piece of string mentioned in the colloquy between Judge Melbourne and defense counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Every person who shall wear or carry any dirk knife, bowie knife, switchblade knife, sandclub, metal knuckles, razor, nunchaku, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon of any kind, whatsoever (penknives without switchblade and handguns excepted) concealed upon or about his person, and every person who shall wear or carry any such weapon, chemical mace or tear gas device openly with the intent or purpose of injuring any person in any unlawful manner, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor____”
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.