Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 8 Md. App. 285 - Sutton v. State

8 Md. App. 285 - Sutton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
November 2005
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 2005

21 state decisions

16019691970198019902000decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Bruton v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Harrington v. California

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

  1. “"In the instant case all four appellants are found in the joint possession of stolen merchandise approximately two hours after the time of the crime. This fact alone sufficiently supports the convictions of all appellants because the recent exclusive possession of stolen goods permits a rational inference of fact that they were the thieves or the burglars. McGlothlin v. State, 1 Md. App. 256 , 229 A.2d 428 , Anglin v. State, 1 Md.App. 85 , 227 A.2d 364 . Indeed they could have each been convicted of both charges since there was no merger.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.