80 Md. App. 532 - Bricker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[0]nce mental retardation is established, the sole determination is whether the mental retardation so affected the individual that he or she lacked the capacity to understand the consequences of his or her acts. In comparison, a determination of criminal responsibility of an individual with a mental disorder involves a more complicated analysis. Once it is established that an individual has a transient mental disorder, it next must be determined whether the individual was affected by the disorder at the time of the crime and, if so, whether the disorder affected the individual’s capacity to understand the criminality of his or her act. Arguably, it would be easier to show that a mentally retarded person lacked the capacity for appreciation because of his or her low intelligence.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Bricker · 85 Md. App. 674 - In Re Devon T.

2. “An expert opinion derives its probative force from the facts on which it is predicated, and these must be legally sufficient to sustain the opinion of the expert. The premises of fact must disclose that the expert is sufficiently familiar with the subject matter under investigation to elevate his opinion above the realm of conjecture and speculation, for no matter how highly qualified the expert may be in his field, his opinion has no probative force unless a sufficient factual basis to support a rational conclusion is shown. The opinion of an expert, therefore, must be based on facts, proved or assumed, sufficient to form a basis for an opinion, and cannot be invoked to supply the substantial facts necessary to support such conclusion. (Citations omitted)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 82 Md. App. 489 - Ezenwa v. State

3. ““[Defense Counsel]: ... I am going to argue to the jury insanity. [The Court]: How are you going to argue insanity if you don’t have any expert saying that he was insane at the time? Don’t you have to have some medical expert get up here and say that he was not responsible because at the time he could not appreciate the criminality of his actions and conform his conduct to the level of the law? [Defense Counsel]: What we are dealing with is mental retardation here as opposed to your straight old-fashion insanity, mental disorder. That is what we are talking about. Not criminally responsible.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Bricker