Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 77 MDAPP 767 - Crouch v. State

Crouch v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2004
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Jones v. State · Wood v. State · 8 Md. App. 134 - Franklin v. State · Cooper v. State · Bradbury 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The corroboration requirement as to a defendant’s confession is very different from the corroboration requirement as to accomplice testimony. When a conviction is based upon the testimony of an accomplice, there must be some independent corroboration establishing the defendant’s criminal agency. When a conviction is based upon the testimony or statements of the defendant himself, on the other hand, there must be some independent corroboration of the corpus delicti of the crime itself.”
    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.