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.
15 Maryland opinions name it 3 courts 1976–2023 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Young v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2021The Young Court observed that “a statement could be accusatory and, therefore, be testimonial under Justice Alito’s test, but without being formal enough to satisfy Justice Thomas’s test,” while, conversely, a statement “could be formal under Justice Thomas’s test … but without accusing or targeting a particular suspect and, therefore, not be testimonial under Justice Alito’s opinion.” Id. at 543 (citing Young, 63 A.3d at 1043 ). 2021The Young Court observed that “a statement could be accusatory and, therefore, be testimonial under Justice Alito’s test, but without being formal enough to satisfy Justice Thomas’s test,” while, conversely, a statement “could be formal under Justice Thomas’s test … but without accusing or targeting a particular suspect and, therefore, not be testimonial under Justice Alito’s opinion.” Id. at 543 (citing Young, 63 A.3d at 1043 ). | 1 | 3 |
Williams v. Illinoisred2 sentences2015Young v. United States, 63 A.3d 1033, 1043 (D.C. 2013). 33 first determine if the forensic report at issue reflects the “‘solemnity of an affidavit or deposition’”, (Derr II, 434 Md. at 113, 73 A.3d at 268, quoting Williams, 567 U.S. at __ , 132 S.Ct. at 2260 , 183 L.Ed.2d at 133 (Thomas, J., concurring)), which would satisfy Justice Thomas’s inquiry. 2015This expanded approach to Williams requires that we, like our brethren on the trial courts, first determine if the forensic report at issue reflects the “ ‘solemnity of an affidavit or deposition’ ”, (Derr II, 434 Md. at 113 , 73 A.3d at 268 , quoting Williams , 567 U.S. *548 at-, 132 S.Ct. at 2260 , 183 L.Ed.2d at 133 (Thomas, J., concurring)), which would satisfy Justice Thomas’s inquiry. | 1 | 2 |
Maine v. Taylorgreen2 sentences2021See, e.g., Maine v. Taylor, 477 U.S. 131, 138 (1986). 2021See, e.g., Maine v. Taylor, 477 U.S. 131, 138 (1986). | 1 | 1 |
Marks v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2015A statement, 25 The “Marks Rule” instructs lower courts that, when the Supreme Court issues a plurality opinion, “the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those Members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds.” Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188, 193 , 97 S.Ct. 990, 993 , 51 L.Ed.2d 260, 266 (1977) (internal quotation marks omitted). 28 conversely, could be formal under Justice Thomas’s test, according to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, but without accusing or targeting a particular suspect and, therefore, not be testimonial under Justice Al 2015A statement, 25 The “Marks Rule” instructs lower courts that, when the Supreme Court issues a plurality opinion, “the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those Members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds.” Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188, 193 , 97 S.Ct. 990, 993 , 51 L.Ed.2d 260, 266 (1977) (internal quotation marks omitted). 28 conversely, could be formal under Justice Thomas’s test, according to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, but without accusing or targeting a particular suspect and, therefore, not be testimonial under Justice Al | 1 | 1 |
Attorney Grievance Commission v. Thomasgreen2 sentences2015Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Thomas, 440 Md. 523, 555 , 103 A.3d 629 (2014) (“Attorneys violate MLRPC 8.4(c) when they ... conceal material information from their clients, even if they have not misrepresented explicitly the information.”). 2015Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Thomas, 440 Md. 523, 555 , 103 A.3d 629 (2014) (“Attorneys violate MLRPC 8.4(c) when they ... conceal material information from their clients, even if they have not misrepresented explicitly the information.”). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Appeal No. 544, Term 1974green1 sentence1976See In Re Appeal No. 544, September Term, 1974, 25 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Eric Thomas
green
2 sentences2023The Eleventh Circuit did not address the District Court’s treatment of the forensic scan results as akin to a photocopy, but concluded that the warrant was valid because “the only information” utilized “in obtaining the search warrant was data collected prior to Thomas’s objection.” Id. at 1242 . 2023The Eleventh Circuit did not address the District Court’s treatment of the forensic scan results as akin to a photocopy, but concluded that the warrant was valid because “the only information” utilized “in obtaining the search warrant was data collected prior to Thomas’s objection.” Id. at 1242 . | 2 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Peterson
green
2 sentences2019That is all we need to decide. 11 See, e.g., State v. Peterson, 315 Md. at 82-90 . 12 Or perhaps it will not, given the decision we reach on the merits below. 11 B. 2019That is all we need to decide. 11 See, e.g., State v. Peterson, 315 Md. at 82-90 . 12 Or perhaps it will not, given the decision we reach on the merits below. 11 B. | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Johnson v. State
green
1 sentence2020First, this was the first overdose-related involuntary manslaughter case to reach our Court after the Court of Appeals issued Thomas, 464 Md. at 169–72, and the first opportunity to identify situations that would or wouldn’t satisfy Thomas’s new standard.1 After analyzing the facts of this case against the Thomas factors, we concluded that “[i]nterpreting Thomas to assume knowledge of a drug’s contents with its riskiness on the part of all low-level, infrequent dealers would lead to the per se rule Thomas warned against[,]” and that “if this drug sale qualifies as grossly negligent, we struggl | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Thomas
green
1 sentence2020First, this was the first overdose-related involuntary manslaughter case to reach our Court after the Court of Appeals issued Thomas, 464 Md. at 169–72, and the first opportunity to identify situations that would or wouldn’t satisfy Thomas’s new standard.1 After analyzing the facts of this case against the Thomas factors, we concluded that “[i]nterpreting Thomas to assume knowledge of a drug’s contents with its riskiness on the part of all low-level, infrequent dealers would lead to the per se rule Thomas warned against[,]” and that “if this drug sale qualifies as grossly negligent, we struggl | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Rich v. State
green
2 sentences2017In the opinion below, the Court of Special Appeals referred to Mr. Thomas’ defense attorney as "Co-Defendant’s Counsel.” Rich v. State, 230 Md.App. 537, 556-57 , 148 A.3d 377 (2016). 2017In the opinion below, the Court of Special Appeals referred to Mr. Thomas’ defense attorney as "Co-Defendant’s Counsel.” Rich v. State, 230 Md.App. 537, 556-57 , 148 A.3d 377 (2016). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Derr v. State
green
2 sentences2015This expanded approach to Williams requires that we, like our brethren on the trial courts, first determine if the forensic report at issue reflects the “ ‘solemnity of an affidavit or deposition’ ”, (Derr II, 434 Md. at 113 , 73 A.3d at 268 , quoting Williams , 567 U.S. *548 at-, 132 S.Ct. at 2260 , 183 L.Ed.2d at 133 (Thomas, J., concurring)), which would satisfy Justice Thomas’s inquiry. 2015This expanded approach to Williams requires that we, like our brethren on the trial courts, first determine if the forensic report at issue reflects the “ ‘solemnity of an affidavit or deposition’ ”, (Derr II, 434 Md. at 113 , 73 A.3d at 268 , quoting Williams , 567 U.S. *548 at-, 132 S.Ct. at 2260 , 183 L.Ed.2d at 133 (Thomas, J., concurring)), which would satisfy Justice Thomas’s inquiry. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Michael Alvarado v. R.Q. Hickman, Warden, Acting Warden of Mule Creek State Prison
green
1 sentence2012Thomas, for example, refers to Alvarado v. Hickman, 316 F.3d 841 (9th Cir.2002) to argue that his being interviewed as a suspect indicates he was in custody, but he does not analyze the totality of the circumstances in Hickman ; rather, he focuses exclusively on the issue of whether the person being interviewed was a suspect. . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Thomas v. State
green
2 sentences2012Respondent points out that, at trial, “when [defense] counsel objected to the State’s request to introduce Benjamin’s prior consistent statements, Thomas never alleged the existence of an additional motive to fabricate at the time of Benjamin’s arrest.” In addition, Respondent asserts that it was not until defense counsel’s closing argument that he mentioned that “Benjamin may have had a motive to fabricate at the time of his arrest.” Thus, Respondent concludes, by pointing out that, even though the Court of Special Appeals acknowledged that Benjamin had multiple motives to fabricate, that cou 2012App. at 398 , 32 A.3d at 509 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
State v. Thomas
green
2 sentences1992In Thomas II, we held that the post conviction court committed reversible error when it sustained Thomas’s objection to the State’s attempt to elicit from Kinsley his understanding of the results of Dr. Beran’s psychiatric evaluation. 325 Md. at 173 , 599 A.2d at 1177 . 1992In Thomas II, we held that the post conviction court committed reversible error when it sustained Thomas’s objection to the State’s attempt to elicit from Kinsley his understanding of the results of Dr. Beran’s psychiatric evaluation. 325 Md. at 173 , 599 A.2d at 1177 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.