Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 68 Md. App. 121 - Young v. State

68 Md. App. 121 - Young v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
April 2007
most recently cited

20 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Gideon v. Wainwright · Escobedo v. Illinois · Hurtado v. People of the State of California · Spano v. People of the State of New York

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. “Failure to take defendant before judicial officer after arrest. (a) Confession not rendered inadmissible. — A confession may not be excluded from evidence solely because the defendant was not taken before a judicial officer after arrest within any time period specified by Title 4 of the Maryland Rules. (b) Effect of failure to comply strictly with Title 4 of the Maryland Rules. — Failure to strictly comply with the provisions of Title 4 of the Maryland Rules pertaining to taking a defendant before a judicial officer after arrest is only one factor, among others, to be considered by the court in deciding the voluntariness and admissibility of a confession.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “You are the sole judges of whether a witness should be believed, and in making this decision, you should apply your own common sense and everyday experiences in life. In determining whether a witness should be believed and what weight to give the testimony of that witness, you should carefully judge all the testimony and evidence and circumstances under which each witness has testified.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““A police officer’s testimony should be considered by you just as any other evidence in this case, and in evaluating his credibility, you should use the same guidelines which you apply to the testimony of any other witness. In no event should you give any greater or lesser credence to the testimony of any witness merely because he is a police officer.””
    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.