Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 Md. App. 543 - Parker v. State

72 Md. App. 543 - Parker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently June 2018

17 state decisions

901987199020002010decided

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 Cox v. Prince George's County · County Commissioners v. Secretary of Health & Mental Hygiene · 53 Md. App. 691 - Gillis v. State · 66 Md. App. 294 - Bell v. State · State v. Hews

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

  1. “In a criminal proceeding, the prosecution shall, upon written demand of a defendant filed in the proceeding at least five days prior to a trial in the proceeding, require the presence of the chemist, analyst, or any person in the chain of custody as a prosecution witness. The provisions of §§ 10-1001 and 10-1002 are applicable in a criminal proceeding only when a copy of the report or statement to be introduced is mailed, delivered, or made available to counsel for the defendant or to defendant personally when he is not represented by counsel, at least ten days prior to the introduction of the report or statement at trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Maryland Courts and Jud.Proc. Code Ann. § 10-1001 provides a mechanism by which a chemist’s report of analysis of an alleged controlled dangerous substance may be admitted as prima facie evidence, ‘ [f]or the purpose of establishing that physical evidence in a criminal ... proceeding constitutes a particular controlled dangerous substance ...’, without the necessity of the chemist appearing in court. Section 10-1002 makes similar provision as to the chain of custody report.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Thus, the chemist’s report and the chain of custody form are prima facie evidence of their contents only if (1) they are furnished to the defendant at least ten days prior to their introduction at trial and (2) a defendant does not make written demand, in a timely fashion, for the production of the chemist or persons in the chain of custody as prosecution witnesses.””
    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.