67 Md. App. 347 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Ware v. State (2000), Treece v. State (1988)
30 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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Allen v. United States · Missouri v. Hunter · Ungar v. Sarafite
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“intended to prevent those who have already demonstrated a propensity for violence, as evidenced by a conviction of a crime of violence, from possessing handguns.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Our independent review of the record does not indicate that the trial court erred in failing to grant Thanos a competency hearing____While Thanos did make some peculiar remarks to the trial judge, his words on the whole were very lucid. He appeared to grasp all of his rights as they arose throughout the proceedings .... Based on the foregoing, we think the record discloses that Thanos met the two-pronged test for competency to stand trial. He exhibited both “present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding — and ... a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.” All else aside, Thanos’s thoughtful contemplation of how his own potentially disruptive presence would affect the deliberations of the fact-finder indicates that he grasped not only the basic elements of the trial process but also its strategic dimensions. The trial court did not err in not conducting, sua sponte, a competency hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The judge’s questions concerned not only appellant’s understanding of the charges and of his rights, but also inquired into appellant’s age, family history, educational background, work history, medical history and psychological history. Appellant answered all of the judge’s questions in a rational, coherent manner. He also displayed a marked degree of sophistication about the law. While his legal skills were not those of a lawyer, he did appear to have gained some practical understanding of the law, perhaps through his prior confrontations with it. In sum, there is every indication in the record that appellant met the standard of competency to stand trial.”
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.