Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Maryland opinions name it 1 courts 1987–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Maryland courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Epps v. Stategreen2 sentences2019The Epps v. State passage concluded that the delay in question was enough "to provoke inquiry into the other interrelated factors which go into the balance ... of Barker v. Wingo . " 276 Md. at 111 , 345 A.2d 62 (emphasis supplied). 2019The Epps v. State passage concluded that the delay in question was enough "to provoke inquiry into the other interrelated factors which go into the balance ... of Barker v. Wingo . " 276 Md. at 111 , 345 A.2d 62 (emphasis supplied). | 1 | 2 |
Cross v. Stategreen1 sentence2025See, e.g., Cross, 282 Md. at 474 (noting that all, some, or no other bad act evidence may be admissible depending on the application of the balancing test in 5-404(b)). | 1 | 1 |
Nasim v. Stategreen1 sentence2025Here, though, the circuit court determined that “there is a significant necessity on the part of [all eight fires] that outweighs any prejudice[.]” As we have explained, “[a]rson is likely to be a clandestine offense and proof of it must often be by circumstantial evidence and inferences which may reasonably be drawn therefrom.” Nasim v. State, 34 Md. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Brady v. State
green
2 sentences2019The quoted passage from Brady , 291 Md. at 265 , 434 A.2d 574 , concludes, " What remains is the application of the balancing test. " (Emphasis supplied). 2019The quoted passage from Brady , 291 Md. at 265 , 434 A.2d 574 , concludes, " What remains is the application of the balancing test. " (Emphasis supplied). | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Board of Education v. Regala
neutral
2 sentences1994We emphasize that, in reviewing a case such as the one at hand, we are bound by the decision of the State Board unless “the line drawn by the State Board ... is arbitrary, or clearly in violation of the Education Article, or otherwise contrary to the law.” MCEA v. Bd. of Ed., supra, 311 Md. at 318 , 534 A.2d 980 ; Board of Educ. v. Regala, 87 Md.App. 344, 348-50 , 589 A.2d 993 , cert. denied, 324 Md. 121 , 596 A.2d 627 (1991). 1994We emphasize that, in reviewing a case such as the one at hand, we are bound by the decision of the State Board unless “the line drawn by the State Board ... is arbitrary, or clearly in violation of the Education Article, or otherwise contrary to the law.” MCEA v. Bd. of Ed., supra, 311 Md. at 318 , 534 A.2d 980 ; Board of Educ. v. Regala, 87 Md.App. 344, 348-50 , 589 A.2d 993 , cert. denied, 324 Md. 121 , 596 A.2d 627 (1991). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Montgomery County Education Ass'n v. Board of Education
green
2 sentences1994We emphasize that, in reviewing a case such as the one at hand, we are bound by the decision of the State Board unless “the line drawn by the State Board ... is arbitrary, or clearly in violation of the Education Article, or otherwise contrary to the law.” MCEA v. Bd. of Ed., supra, 311 Md. at 318 , 534 A.2d 980 ; Board of Educ. v. Regala, 87 Md.App. 344, 348-50 , 589 A.2d 993 , cert. denied, 324 Md. 121 , 596 A.2d 627 (1991). 1994We emphasize that, in reviewing a case such as the one at hand, we are bound by the decision of the State Board unless “the line drawn by the State Board ... is arbitrary, or clearly in violation of the Education Article, or otherwise contrary to the law.” MCEA v. Bd. of Ed., supra, 311 Md. at 318 , 534 A.2d 980 ; Board of Educ. v. Regala, 87 Md.App. 344, 348-50 , 589 A.2d 993 , cert. denied, 324 Md. 121 , 596 A.2d 627 (1991). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Barker v. Wingo
green
2 sentences1987The delay complained of is of sufficient constitutional dimension to require the application of the balancing test set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 , 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972). 1987The delay complained of is of sufficient constitutional dimension to require the application of the balancing test set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 , 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.