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.
8 Maryland opinions name it 1 courts 1982–2015 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dorsey v. Stategreen2 sentences1999Nevertheless, what I said in dissent in that case is relevant to this case and bears repeating: "Following a thorough review of our cases and those of the Supreme Court which addressed the issue, this Court, in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), enunciated the test of harmless error which controls the resolution of this case: `... 1999Nevertheless, what I said in dissent in that case is relevant to this case and bears repeating: "Following a thorough review of our cases and those of the Supreme Court which addressed the issue, this Court, in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), enunciated the test of harmless error which controls the resolution of this case: `... | 3 | 5 |
Younie v. Stategreen2 sentences2000In that regard, we have said that the test of harmless error “has been and should be carefully circumscribed.” Younie v. State, 272 Md. 233, 248 , 322 A.2d 211, 219 (1974). 2000In that regard, we have said that the test of harmless error “has been and should be carefully circumscribed.” Younie v. State, 272 Md. 233, 248 , 322 A.2d 211, 219 (1974). | 3 | 3 |
People v. Jablonskigreen2 sentences2000And the continuing validity of the majority’s harmless error analysis makes what was said in People v. Jablonski, 38 Mich.App. 33 , 195 N.W.2d 777, 780 (1972): “Continued expansion of the harmless error rule will merely encourage prosecutors to get such testimony in, since they know that, they have a strong case, such testimony will not be considered to be reversible error, yet if they have a weak case, they will use such testimony to buttress the case to gain a conviction and then hope that the issue is not raised on appeal,” more significant and a matter of concern. 2000And the continuing validity of the majority’s harmless error analysis makes what was said in People v. Jablonski, 38 Mich.App. 33 , 195 N.W.2d 777, 780 (1972): “Continued expansion of the harmless error rule will merely encourage prosecutors to get such testimony in, since they know that, they have a strong case, such testimony will not be considered to be reversible error, yet if they have a weak case, they will use such testimony to buttress the case to gain a conviction and then hope that the issue is not raised on appeal,” more significant and a matter of concern. | 3 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wilhelm v. State
green
2 sentences2015We have no quarrel, moreover, with the proposition that the prosecutor has “reasonable latitude in its opening statement, but he should be confined to statements based on facts that can be proved.” Wilhelm, 272 Md. at 412 , 326 A.2d 707 . 2015We have no quarrel, moreover, with the proposition that the prosecutor has “reasonable latitude in its opening statement, but he should be confined to statements based on facts that can be proved.” Wilhelm, 272 Md. at 412 , 326 A.2d 707 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Johnson v. State
green
2 sentences1995We made clear in Johnson , that harmless error analysis, as applied in Dorsey , applied equally to arguments of counsel to the jury as to evidentiary rulings. 325 Md. at 521 , 601 A.2d at 1097-98 . 1995We made clear in Johnson , that harmless error analysis, as applied in Dorsey , applied equally to arguments of counsel to the jury as to evidentiary rulings. 325 Md. at 521 , 601 A.2d at 1097-98 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Midgett v. State
green
2 sentences1982The State relied on the previously quoted passage from Midgett v. State, supra, 216 Md. at 36-37 , reiterating the test of harmless error with respect to communications from the court to the jury. 5 Md. 1982The State relied on the previously quoted passage from Midgett v. State, supra, 216 Md. at 36-37 , reiterating the test of harmless error with respect to communications from the court to the jury. 5 Md.App. 389 -390. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
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.