8 Md. App. 187 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

30 state decisions

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

1. ““It is, of course, elementary that a warrantless arrest is valid where the arresting police officer has probable cause to believe that a misdemeanor has been or is being committed in his presence and that the arrestee is the misdemeanant. Winebrenner v. State, 6 Md. App. 440 ; Robinson v. State, 4 Md. App. 515 ; Salmon v. State, 2 Md. App. 513 . In determining whether a misdemeanor has been committed in the officer’s presence the term ‘presence’ denotes that the commission of the misdemeanor is perceptible to the officer’s senses, whether they be visual, auditory, or olfactory. Davids v. State, 208 Md. 377 ; Ramsey v. State, 5 Md. App. 563 . And in determining whether probable cause exists to justify the arrest, ‘only the probability, and not a prima facie showing of criminal activity is the standard of probable cause.’ Spinelli v. United States, 393 U. S. 410 , 89 S. Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637, 645 . More specifically, the rule of probable cause is a non-technical conception of a reasonable ground for belief of guilt, requiring less evidence for such belief than would justify a conviction, but more evidence than would arouse a mere suspicion. Edwardsen v. State, 243 Md. 131 ; Radcliffe v. State, 6 Md. App. 285 ; Cornish v. State, 6 Md. App. 167 ; Simms v. State, 4 Md. App. 160 .” (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 37 Md. App. 373 - Ford v. State