93 Md. App. 522 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Whether the jury may have been more inclined to believe that the victim had consented on this occasion if it had been provided with the evidence that she had exchanged sex for drugs in the past is problematic,[ 5 ] since she made clear that she had never engaged in sexual relations for drugs with the participants in this case. The net effect of admitting the evidence of prior sexual conduct would have been that the proceedings could have been refocused on an inquiry into prior sexual encounters with other partners.”

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

2. “in view of the great potential that the jury would have viewed the victim simply as a fallen woman and not focused on whether they believed her testimony that she was prepared to pay for the drugs as opposed to the testimony of appellant and Jackson that the understanding was that sex would be exchanged for drugs.”

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