94 Md. App. 356 - Channer v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
July 2001
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Pemberton · Williams v. United States · State v. Frye
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The fact that a mistrial was declared at the close of the first trial did not nullify the pretrial hearing on the motion to suppress. See Johnson v. State, 67 Md.App. 347, 374-76 , 507 A.2d 1134 , cert. denied, 307 Md. 260 , 513 A.2d 314 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 993 , 107 S.Ct. 594 , 93 L.Ed.2d 595 (1986) (a court presiding over the retrial of a defendant .whose first trial ended in a mistrial did not abuse its discretion by refusing to rehear a motion to suppress evidence that was denied prior to the first trial). “When such a motion has been fully heard and considered and there is no new evidence which was unavailable at the first hearing, the trial judge may exercise his discretion and bind himself by the prior ruling.... ” Id. (quoting Logue v. State, 282 Md. 625, 628 , 386 A.2d 780 (1978) (a court presiding over the retrial of a defendant who had been granted a new trial properly refused to rehear a motion to suppress evidence that was denied prior to the first trial)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Icgoren v. State“At the first trial, defense counsel attempted to reopen the motion to suppress the statements but was not permitted to do so. After the first trial ended in a mistrial, defense counsel withdrew from the case and was replaced by new counsel. That counsel as well attempted to reopen the matter. At a hearing held prior to the second trial, the request was again denied.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Icgoren v. State
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.