Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 Md. App. 686 - Marsh v. State

98 Md. App. 686 - Marsh v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
March 1995
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Brady v. United States · Hunt v. State · Hoey v. State · Treece v. State

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. “THE COURT: Now, my understanding is that Mr. Marsh prays a court trial. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: That is correct. THE COURT: But, I presume that he has in the past sought a jury trial, is that right? [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Originally prayed a jury trial, that is correct. THE COURT: All right. Let me advise you, Mr. Marsh, that you do have an absolute right to a jury trial or a court trial at your request. Now, a jury trial—a court trial, of course, means that the judge listens to all the facts and evidence in the case and decides whether you’re guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In a jury trial, you, [Defense Counsel] and [the State’s Attorney] would choose twelve persons from the now Motor Vehicle Administration registry and those twelve people could be young or old, men or women, black, white, Oriental, native American. In other words, those twelve people could be a cross section of your community, which is Baltimore City, and those twelve people would have to decide your guilt by the same standard a judge applies and that standard again is beyond a reasonable doubt. The difference is that all twelve would have to agree that you are guilty before you could be convicted or all twelve would have to agree, agree you were not guilty before you could be acquitted. If they couldn’t agree and came back nine to three, ten to two, even eleven to one, it’s called a hung jury and if there is a hung jury the State’s Attorney has the option to dismiss the charges against you or to try you over and”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Rule 4-246. WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL—CIRCUIT COURT (a) Generally.—In the circuit court a defendant having a right to trial by jury shall be tried by a jury unless the right is waived pursuant to section (b) of this Rule. If the waiver is accepted by the court, the State may not elect a trial by jury. (b) Procedure for Acceptance of Waiver.—A defendant may waive the right to a trial by jury at any time before the commencement of trial. The court may not accept the waiver until it determines, after an examination of the defendant on the record in open court conducted by the court, the State’s Attorney, the attorney for the defendant, or any combination thereof, that the waiver is made knowingly and voluntarily.[ 1 ]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.